Advanced search

Daily Mail have shut down IstyOsty!

(13 Posts)
AliceWyrld Wed 14-Sep-11 08:09:16

I was just looking for that site where you can link without giving the sites traffic (for this thread), which people use so they can link to the DM, and it's gone. DM have closed it down. So if anyone was ever in any doubt as to why papers post the inflammatory crap they do, ta dah!

Thumbwitch Wed 14-Sep-11 08:10:15

How do you know DM have closed it down? I agree, it was jolly useful, but how do you know it was the DM?

ChaosTrulyReigns Wed 14-Sep-11 08:14:12

Does that make actual sense?

I'm confused about the last sentecne.

And where is the link to the Daily Mail's power of shutdown?

AliceWyrld Wed 14-Sep-11 08:14:13

Good point. Sorry for the half a story. I'm doing several things at once.


and here

AliceWyrld Wed 14-Sep-11 08:15:15

CTR - legal action. A 'cease and desist' letter.

ChaosTrulyReigns Wed 14-Sep-11 08:18:04

Oh blimey.

That's interesting.

Thanks for links. smile

Thumbwitch Wed 14-Sep-11 08:29:26

Aha. Now it makes sense - thanks for the links. And no, no suprise whatsoever that it's happened, grrrrrr.

sprogger Wed 14-Sep-11 09:03:38

So they are baiting us and hoping to scoop up more clickthrough traffic. Even more reason to ignore them, frankly.

BobBanana Wed 14-Sep-11 10:10:07

Message withdrawn

JLK2 Wed 14-Sep-11 10:20:19

If you want to link to the Daily Mail to use it in an argument, be fair and credit them instead of trying to steal their content.

sprogger Thu 15-Sep-11 19:52:23

Whatever do you mean, "steal their content?" The content is credited as belonging to the DM. What I'm withholding is my web stats to fuel their advertising traffic. It's the equivalent of picking up a discarded copy of the Mail on the tube and showing my mates one of their insane articles.

JLK2 Thu 15-Sep-11 23:42:52

The content is only there because advertisers are prepared to pay for it.

It doesn't cost you anything to click on it. If you don't like the Mail, don't read it's articles.

sprogger Fri 16-Sep-11 12:36:58

So you're saying that no-one should ever pick up a paper they haven't paid for? Please don't tell me that ads in the print edition are costed on unique visitors. They run on circulation figures, which are calculated from cover price.

Notice as well that equating caching with "stealing content" is only aimed at tiny outfits like IstyOsty. Don't hold your breath waiting for the Mail to go after Google, who cache far more content than Isty Osty and have more than enough legal firepower to run the Mail into the ground.

I once sat across from an old codger on the tube who asked me to pass him a discarded Guardian. As I handed it to him, he remarked: "I'd never pay for the bloody thing, but I occasionally enjoy getting annoyed at the nonsense they print." According to you, he was "stealing content" because he read it without paying the cover price and being included in circulation figures. Do you understand how ridiculous you sound?

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now