What is my position, legally, morally and with regard to Wizzley publishing.

In a former life I wrote some articles at Hubpages about Diabetes. All of these were from a personal perspective. All hubs on HP about diabetes were removed months ago. I have decided to rewrite and resurrect them at Wizzley. They are most definitely de-indexed from G and other SE's. I checked a lot of paragraphs to see that this was the case. I have created 4 diabetes Wizers to date.

I have today created two more, one of which has details that would be difficult to rewrite as it contains specific details, i.e. about types of diabetes. It followed a great deal of research on my part originally and the content was not to be found in my specific format, elsewhere.

On trying to publish, a few moments ago, a warning appeared telling me that portions of my Wizer were to be found elsewhere. It gave the particular location - a hub. The content there that was at issue had a short section, about 2 sentences, that were directly copied from my originals. I thought they would be pointing to my original hubs, which no longer exist, and that would be the matter closed.

However, they point to a website where a huge chunk of my original hub, and that I am reproducing now at Wizzley, has been copied verbatim - purporting to be the websites copy or the copy of the hub member that posted it there.

My questions:

As I unpublished it as a hub, can I still claim copyright?
Is it OK for me to republish it here, although it has been copied elsewhere?
Should I ask the hubber to remove the copy from both the hub where a portion has been reproduced, and picked up by the Wizzley check, and from the website where I do not think the hubber has control over the content?
Is there a resolution to my dilemma? 

It's just duplicate content. You can ask the hubber to summarize your stuff and then link to your Wizzle when it's completed. You can rewrite the duplicate portion yourself. Either way you can then publish here once the text don't match.

I try not to let this kind of stuff drive me nuts - and that isn't easy. Some times it does bring me to tears.

D_A a rewrite is simply not going to cut mustard for instance, a portion of the offending material goes like this:

Type 2 diabetes - aka NIDDM (Non-Insulin-Dependant Diabetes Mellitus). 
This is the type characterised by high blood-glucose, caused by insulin resistance and relative insulin deficiency. 
Also known as 'adult onset diabetes' or 'maturity onset diabetes'. 
The latter is confusing as there is also another diabetes form known as MODY.

The offending key words (not the noise words) are facts not conjecture. I have changed it somewhat for noise words - to make it read better - but the key words are as they are, they cannot be changed.

This is only a small excerpt.

Drives me to distraction sometimes.

The best solution for me would be for Wizzley to say 'publish' and be damned, but I don't want to bring possible disrepute to the site without first getting an OK from the powers that be.

If you wrote the original, and it is only a sentence or so that is duplicate, you can go ahead and hit the publish button here.  After all, even it was a quotation, there would be some duplication of text. 

The short excerpt is on the hub. It does not point to my old hub. It points to about 100 to 200 words copied directly from my original and reproduced on another site, without attribution. Wizzley picked up on the excerpt rather than the substantial reproduction.

The reproduced portion is on a site of a 'doctor' that publishes books on the subject.

Oh b....r it I'm gonna publish. If I need to take it down later today so be it.

I would also send a friendly note to this 'doctors' website telling him that he is in breach of copyright as you can prove, hopefully, with the data from your back-up copy that you have created that content first.

Sam, unfortunately it was one of my first hubs, and was deleted from HP before I started keeping copyright details.

Could you give me the links to your articles in question, Chaz?

humagaia: 08. Mar 2012, 12:59

---

Sam, unfortunately it was one of my first hubs, and was deleted from HP before I started keeping copyright details.

Yes, but you have a copy of the word doc or whatever you wrote it with? If not, how have you transferred it to Wizzley? That electronic doc has some info about creation date etc.

http://wizzley.com/types-of-diabetes-gestational-mellitus-1-2-3-pre-diabetes/

http://wizzley.com/pre-diabetes-borderline-diabetes/

The first one is the offending item - I have not tried the second yet.

On further investigation the website is a blog by the person who linked there with the copy that your check picks up on. It does link at the bottom to the original hubs - which no longer exist - and give 404's. 

I have sent a private mail to the hubber, who I falsely accused, and asked if she could change the copy or remove it.

I think I am home free as the blog does point to what was my original and thus establishes that mine came first.

I am going to publish if that is OK with you chef.

Please publish your pages, Chaz. Otherwise, I cannot do a dupe check.

Both articles seem to be fine, Chaz.  

thanks chef, appreciated 

I like the quick resolution of this matter.

Good show!

Why not see if the blog can link to your new articles, since the old ones are gone?

Paula, I have asked whether the article can point to my new article and whether the website can also. It is no use to the website to have broken links.

Yes, you will get backlinks, and they will add value.  Win-win.

Glad you worked this out, I've been a bit under the weather today, just checking my messages and noted your post.  I look forward to reading your wizzes.