Stealing home(page)

Leslie Hook '06 was researching a story for the Far Eastern Economic Review when she needed to contact the Philosophy School at Renmin University of China. Assuming that the Internet would be the best place to find the school's phone number, she searched for the its website, only to be greeted by a familiar motif of orange and black.

"At first I couldn't believe my eyes," Hook recalled in an interview. "I was just staring at the screen and blinking." The page that came up — http://sph.ruc.edu.cn/en — was indeed the Philosophy School's English-language website, but its design was nearly identical to Princeton's homepage, save for altered text and photos. Hook, a former staff member of The Daily Princetonian, notified Hugo Restall, the editor of the Far Eastern Economic Review (FEER), who wrote a lighthearted note about the websites' similarities on the magazine's blog. Natasha Degen '06, a former 'Prince' editor, then stumbled across the post and passed the information on to the paper.

"Those wondering whether the Chinese value system includes respect for intellectual property should pay a visit to the Web site of People's University's philosophy department," Restall said on the blog. "As the Chinese saying goes, to steal a book is an honorable offense, and the philosophers seem to be sending the same message about stealing web pages."

University officials were unaware of the existence of the similarly crafted site, which claims to be copyrighted in 2006, until they were notified by the 'Prince.'

"Seeing the site, it is obvious ... that they copied our homepage," University spokeswoman Cass Cliatt '96 said. "However, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. We are pleased that people recognize the relevance of our website, including its design and ease of navigation. It is praise, in a way."

The University will respond by contacting officials at Renmin, which is considered one of China's top universities, and ask them "to change their design, because, of course, they're not affiliated with Princeton," Cliatt said.

Princeton must be careful in its response, however, because "trademark and copyright laws are very different in China," Cliatt said, and because the Renmin "is an institution of higher learning that, in other circumstances, we might have had a relationship with."

The Office of General Counsel is currently reviewing the matter and deciding what legal action, if any, might be appropriate, University Counsel Clayton Marsh '85 said. "Our sole interest here is the elimination of confusion," Cliatt added.

The situation underscores recent debates about international intellectual property laws and internet ethics, especially questions involving China.

"There is a fair amount of copying on the Internet, and a lot of copying in the offline world as well," computer science professor and technology policy expert Ed Felten said. "From a technical standpoint, it's not very difficult to do this kind of copying. The barriers are legal and social."

"Most people want their design to look original and not like they've copied it from someone else," Felten said, adding that in this case, "at least they were not pretending to be Princeton, so in that respect the design was different."

Telephone operators at the Philosophy School were unable to direct 'Prince' reporters to officials in charge of the site, and the site's webmaster did not respond to an email requesting comment.

Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

"I think it just goes to show how much fluidity and flexibility there can be in intellectual property rights," Hook said, but added that the posting on FEER's blog was not meant to spur debate or create issues for either university.

"We hadn't made any attempt to contact either party. Our blog is usually pretty lighthearted, as our journalism is in the magazine."

"I don't think there was any malicious intent on behalf of anyone," Hook added. "In fact, I would not have wished it upon Renmin University to have this become a big issue for them."