How do I (legitimately) download an entire website

[Garnett]

EDIT: Not to worry. I found a solution that has worked. I'm in two minds about posting the answer here. I think it may get people's backs up. If there are any replies to this I'll garner popular opinion and base my decision on that...

This is a bit long. I'll highlight an edited version.

I appreciate I may just be reigniting an old "discussion" but I would like to download an entire website, and I can't figure out how.

First let me explain the situation.

My girlfriend works for a small design company.

They recently paid £2,000 to a "website designer" (I use the term loosely) to design their website.

It is shocking. Low-res pictures everywhere, broken links, and the worst: cutnpasted metatags taken from a huge, and very well-known web based company.

This means when Google picks up the site, the description will infringe the big company's copyright, and is nothing whatsoever to do with the work the company does!

In places the website looks really dated. We're talking 1995 here (and I'm not kidding).

I know a little (a very little) about web design, and I honestly think I could have done better.

I want to download the entire website onto a memory stick so I can tweak it offline, and then show my girlfriend's directors, so they can see whether they like my improvements before actually putting them in place.

This should mean they don't have to pay the designer any more money (I actually think they should try to get some of their money back, but that's a different matter).

I think I would be acting lawfully doing this (,please advise if not), and I would be really grateful if anyone can help.

Thanks in advance for any constructive advice, even if it is along the lines of "this is illegal, you should not do it". (I'm pretty sure it is legit, though. The company has paid for the website, so now it owns the copyrights, not the designer, right?)


EDIT: Not to worry. I found a solution that has worked. I'm in two minds about posting the answer here. I think it may get people's backs up. If there are any replies to this I'll garner popular opinion and base my decision on that...

[PrntRhd]

The question is whether it is better to tweak the existing site or replace it with an improved one.

The earlier discussion you referred to was about downloading a whole site's content to "use" it rather than make payment for subscribing to the medical site.

Your question still raises some ethical alarms in this aspect:
You have to get prior written permission from the site owner or the original developer before downloading the whole site and modifying it, it is the developer's work that is copyrighted, and you cannot go around taking the content, modifying it, and take credit for it.

The fact that you believe the site developer used content from other sites has to be addressed on it's own terms, if you can prove this, the company directors have to be informed of the potential liability issue so it can be investigated.

It is not about the tools to download the site, it is about the content and infringing the terms of the site's use.

[Garnett]

The question is whether it is better to tweak the existing site or replace it with an improved one. I agree. Personally I want to go all csszen, and separate the content and the stylesheet, which will mean a pretty fundamental overhaul. However in terms of layout and appearence the current site is what the directors want. It has to look much like it does (albeit with better pictures, and smoother operation).

The earlier discussion you referred to was about downloading a whole site's content to "use" it rather than make payment for subscribing to the medical site. Also agreed. My 2p worth: That guy has the right to download a page of that stuff now, so why not the whole thing?

Your question still raises some ethical alarms in this aspect:
You have to get prior written permission from the site owner or the original developer before downloading the whole site and modifying it, it is the developer's work that is copyrighted, and you cannot go around taking the content, modifying it, and take credit for it.
I don't intend to make any money from this, so I think that goes in my favour. Also, I think as the (freelance) designer's employers, the directors own the copyright. I know they don't mind me using the material and playing around with it. It is clear what the original designer has done, so it wouldn't be possible for me to pass off any of their work as my own, even if I wanted too.

The fact that you believe the site developer used content from other sites has to be addressed on it's own terms, if you can prove this, the company directors have to be informed of the potential liability issue so it can be investigated.
Also agreed. It isn't hard to prove - it's verbatim cut'n;pasted with the other company's name mentioned several times as though it is the site of that company!

It is not about the tools to download the site, it is about the content and infringing the terms of the site's use.
Only thing I disagree about - this thread is definitely about the tools! That's why I asked, but I see where you're coming from.

I don't think I'm infringing the copyright, since I'm not making money from what I intend to do, and I believe the IP rights are held by the directors, and not the designer, and I know they are happy for me to tweak away...

[PrntRhd]

My 2p worth: That guy has the right to download a page of that stuff now, so why not the whole thing?
I will disagree with you on this, the site has the right to post terms of use. Their terms were to have users pay subscription fees, so taking the whole of the information without paying is clearly not legitimate.

[Budfred]

If you have the permission of the directors, why are they not allowing you to directly download the requisite files and work on them?? To say that they are okay with it is not the same as saying you have permission... Before you go messing around with someone else's work, even if it is bad work, I suggest you make sure you have written permission to do so...

I just recently published some material... If someone decided they liked the basic idea, but thought that he/she could do it better so that they took long sections of my work and put it verbatim in their revised version, I would sue for plagiarism... If you want to quote a passage of what I wrote with credit given, that is fine... If you want to take pages of what I wrote and publish without crediting me, that is stealing and legally reprehensible... It is even worse if you just tweak a bit here and there, then claim credit for it...

[Rick]

Here is a link to some legal tools to look at

http://www.pcmag.com/search_results/0%2C1208%2C%2C00.asp?qry=save+site&site=3

[Garnett]

If you have the permission of the directors, why are they not allowing you to directly download the requisite files and work on them?? To say that they are okay with it is not the same as saying you have permission... Before you go messing around with someone else's work, even if it is bad work, I suggest you make sure you have written permission to do so...

Fair point. I probably should, but I am convinced the directors will not mind, and I believe it is their decision. If they do, then I promise I'll come back here and stand up for anyone to say "I told you so". I probably would not get the permission of the original designer, whose work I intend to improve on, but as I am not passing any of their work off as my own, and in any case, since, I believe, the IP rights attach to the directors, not the designer, I don't think this is an issue either.

I just recently published some material... If someone decided they liked the basic idea, but thought that he/she could do it better so that they took long sections of my work and put it verbatim in their revised version, I would sue for plagiarism...

Fair enough, but this differs from your scenario in that:

1) I believe the (potentially) disgruntled designer has passed on the IP rights when selling the website to the Directors (just as any IP rights in a project belong to the employer, not the employee).

2) I don't intend to pass off any of his code as my own.

If you want to quote a passage of what I wrote with credit given, that is fine...

Agreed. As I say, I don't intend to pass anything off as my own, and the designer has been paid for their work.

If you want to take pages of what I wrote and publish without crediting me, that is stealing and legally reprehensible...Agreed, but not IMO applicable here.

It is even worse if you just tweak a bit here and there, then claim credit for it...Agreed, but I will only be claiming credit for those tweaks whilst fully acknowledging what was already there.

[Budfred]

It sounds like you are working really hard to split hairs... If you are honorable and plan to treat this in an honorable manner, you will get clear permission and access to the root files before you proceed... Anything less is just rationalization....

[pangea33]

You have to get prior written permission from the site owner or the original developer before downloading the whole site and modifying it, it is the developer's work that is copyrighted, and you cannot go around taking the content, modifying it, and take credit for it.
I've done a lot of web work in the past, both Freelance and as an employee of different corporations. I've never done any work, other than when dynamically plugging a user record into an ASP model of my dynamic site, where the person buying the site didn't also buy all exclusive rights to the site. Even still, with dynamic templated sites customers retain exclusive rights to all content and data records. This only varies when it is in explicit language in the contract, and there are few people who would commission work that they can't lay claim to.

If you have the permission of the directors, why are they not allowing you to directly download the requisite files and work on them?? To say that they are okay with it is not the same as saying you have permission... Before you go messing around with someone else's work, even if it is bad work, I suggest you make sure you have written permission to do so...
The OP sounds to me like a newish web developer trying to prove himself to a company, so that he can break into the industry. "My boyfriend is really good, he can do a better job for cheaper" "Oh yeah? Tell him to prove it, and then we might take a look at his resume.

Web development and standards are living, breathing entities upon which everyone borrows. To say that you can't use existing content for inspiration, is like saying you can't listen to great musicians for inspiration when writing a new song. There is no risk of copyright infringement when you're working on a project for an intellectual pursuit.

What could the original developer possibly lay claim to? A real cool innovation like AJAX? Complex traversal of the DOM in order to do stuff client side? Fancy dynamic style sheets? Nope. The only thing he can potentially lay claim to are custom components like the data model, the server-side scripting used to truly bring the site to life, data integration scripts, possibly business logic methodologies, and probably something like uncompiled source code for custom modules written in something like java or flash.

You can't get any of this stuff from looking at a rendered webpage, that's why I think it's fine. This is the very best way to learn in my opinion. If this guy wasn't in the process of learning, he'd just build it from scratch. Even if you're reading examples in a book, you're still learning by example.

I just recently published some material... If someone decided they liked the basic idea, but thought that he/she could do it better so that they took long sections of my work and put it verbatim in their revised version, I would sue for plagiarism... If you want to quote a passage of what I wrote with credit given, that is fine... If you want to take pages of what I wrote and publish without crediting me, that is stealing and legally reprehensible... It is even worse if you just tweak a bit here and there, then claim credit for it...
This is another concept entirely, and is absolutely 100% legitimate. You weren't commissioned to write this material for anyone, so you still hold exclusive rights to it. The thread makes me think of something else, like saying no one could borrow the formatting style of your document cause you thought of it first.

Again, passing off content as your own is not ok, which is why I think "Web 2.0" blows chunks. In your example it's very simple to prove your rights to the content based on various time stamps, archived web pages, etc. You could tear a plagiarist apart very quickly. Although in my design experience it's the customer who provides the copy, because they are the experts in what they do. I could never write better copy for the print, auto, medical, or some industry than the customer could.

[Budfred]

This person is not talking about using the site as inspiration... I agree that would be perfectly acceptable use... He is talking about downloading the code for the site and modifying it without the permission of the developer OR the owners of the material... If he gets permission from the owners of the site, the permission of the developer is irrelevant... If he doesn't get permission, he is not entitled to use the material in any way other than as a model for inspiration...

[pangea33]

I'm hearing you now Budfred, and I guess you're absolutely right. It's not realistic to assume others have the same principles as I try to live my life according to. Sad but true.