Hmm baudib's post is like an example of how people on different sides of issues see things differently. He reads that and comes up with the not really witty "Maybe Elias stole it from SJ." I read that and think "They cited their source for a statistic."

Sure, because Madden didn't do any work to find the statistic.

BTW, I think the Detroit Free Press' code on plagiarism is probably germane here:


When material is used in a story from sources other than the writer's own reporting, those sources--other publications, previous Free Press stories, radio or TV newscasts, etc.--should be indicated in the story. That attribution need not be made for simple, verifiable facts like dates, but is essential for information that goes beyond simple fact-quotations or descriptions not heard or seen by the current reporter, characterizations or other generalizations not based on the writer's own reporting, etc...

Using someone else's work without attribution -whether deliberately or thoughtlessly--is a serious ethical breach. Staff members should be alert to the potential for even small, unintentional acts of plagiarism, especially in the reporting of complicated stories involving many sources.

Borrowing ideas from elsewhere, however, is considered fair journalistic practice. Problems arise in the gray areas between the acceptable borrowing of inspiration and the unacceptable stealing of another's work. Our standards:
Words directly quoted from sources other than the writer's own reporting should be attributed. That may mean saying the material came from a previous Free Press story, from a television interview, from a magazine or book or wire service report.

When other work is used as the source of ideas or stylistic inspiration, the result must be clearly your own work. That is, what is acceptable to learn from another are the elements of style and approach-tone, rhythm, vocabulary, topic ideas-and not specific words, phrases, images.

BTW, let me give some examples of information that should be given attribution, and others that don't require it, when presented in a mass media form such as ESPN.com or your local newspaper (with the caveat I mentioned earlier: information disseminated to the press by teams' PR does not require attribution):

Need attribution:
* Zach's expected runs formula (see Mets Geek thread)
* A listing of pitchers between ages 25 and 30 with 200 strikeouts, sorted by using the Lahman database (cite Lahman's)
* Similarity scores (cite Bill James and/or BBREF if that's where you got it from; cite Bill James if you actually calculated yourself.)
* UZR (cite MGL)

Doesn't need attribution;
* "Allen Iverson has scored 38.6 points in the Sixers' last 15 games vs. Indiana.
* The past eight NL champions have not repeated.
* Bobby Cox is one win away from tying Leo Durocher for eighth place in manager wins. The top seven are Connie Mack, John McGraw, Sparky Anderson, Bucky Harris, Joe McCarthy, Tony La Russa and Walter Alston.

* UZR (cite MGL)

Hang on... if we want to post UZR scores for specific players, we'd have to cite MGL?

Obviously, when I discuss UZR the STAT, I have to go "The UZR stat developed by Mr. Lichtman".... but when i go "So and SO had a UZR score of 20", I'd have to cite him?

When I post a player's OBP, I don't have to cite the developer of the OBP stat. I might mention I got the stat off baseballreference.

you missed:

when presented in a mass media form such as ESPN.com or your local newspaper

when presented in a mass media form such as ESPN.com or your local newspaper

Ok, what abuot when I post on my krappy blog nobody reads? If I talk about UZR, woudl I have to cite MGL?

I personally would out of respect, but is it legal if I don't?

I'm not an expert on copyright laws, especially as they pertain to the Internet, which includes a lot of gray area to begin with (is posting to a blog no one reads considered personal use?).

If you post commercial content to a very public Web site, you could get in trouble. For instance, if you run a site that brings in a lot of traffic and start posting Playboy centerfold pics, Playboy and/or the models' reps are going to come after you in a nanosecond.

If you're posting baseball stats to a small nonprofit blog you're probably not in any danger. If MGL posts a list of UZR leaders then that's pretty much fair game. Now he is doing proprietary work for a baseball team; if he were to pass off some material to you privately, because he likes you, and then you post it, then the team he works for might not be very happy with either one of you.

I thought Retrosheet used to have a disclaimer asking people to cite their information, but I can't find it now.

but when i go "So and SO had a UZR score of 20", I'd have to cite him?

something like that, no.

I personally would out of respect, but is it legal if I don't?

Wok, if you ever wonder why your abilities are questioned, go back and read this thread, and the numerous posts that deal with copyright law.

I'm not an expert on copyright laws, especially as they pertain to the Internet, which includes a lot of gray area to begin with (is posting to a blog no one reads considered personal use?).

If you post commercial content to a very public Web site, you could get in trouble. For instance, if you run a site that brings in a lot of traffic and start posting Playboy centerfold pics, Playboy and/or the models' reps are going to come after you in a nanosecond.

If you're posting baseball stats to a small nonprofit blog you're probably not in any danger. If MGL posts a list of UZR leaders then that's pretty much fair game. Now he is doing proprietary work for a baseball team; if he were to pass off some material to you privately, because he likes you, and then you post it, then the team he works for might not be very happy with either one of you.

I thought Retrosheet used to have a disclaimer asking people to cite their information, but I can't find it now.

Baudib, neither the internet nor the commercial nature of a work have anything to do with copyright law, as it pertains to liability or the scope of rights by a copyright holder.

Your weekly bump from IRC.

Wok, if you ever wonder why your abilities are questioned, go back and read this thread, and the numerous posts that deal with copyright law.

Dude, whenever you fancy lawyers post lists of regulations and rules, my brain just filters it out.