In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:
Thank you for the explanation that you emailed me Alan. I would like to apologise publicly for my brash comment about the deletion and as noted to you in my reply to your email, in future if I am unsure about such a situation I shall be contacting you privately for clarification rather than on the public forums.
For those interested in my previously accidentally deleted post that may no longer be relevant... here is the text:
"In reply to Mark Kemball:
From UKC Terms and Conditions - here:
http://www.ukclimbing.com/general/terms.html
"3.2 You agree that any material (including any Intellectual Property Rights in such material), including but not limited to material sent via bulletin boards or articles submitted for publication on the Web Site or in using any of the Web Site Services ("User Generated Content") may be retained as the property of UKClimbing Limited. "Web Site Services" is defined in Clause 5.2 below. UKClimbing Limited shall have no obligations with regard to the User Generated Content to monitor the User Generated Content to ensure that it complies with applicable laws or regulations. You remain solely responsible for the User Generated Content in accordance with Clause 6."
I would say that is fairly definitive. If you post it then you give up intellectual property rights to UKC. If you plagiarised the information that you post then you have already breached someone else's copyright and if they found out then they would be able to sue you. If copyright for information that you have posted is already owned by you, someone else or it is licensed under creative commons then UKC would not be liable to prosecution for using it as they would be doing so in good faith. They have indemnified themselves in this respect with the disclaimer (terms and conditions) linked to above (and actually linked at the foot of every UKC web page).
This should be a heads up for anyone who wishes to maintain information, such as route descriptions, in the public domain. Give copyright to some entity that you wish to hold it in trust of your wishes (noting that if you do so then you must list that entity as the copyright owner when posting the information) or create a creative commons license for the information (and again note on the post that the information is held under a creative commons license).
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/
Posting it to oneself doesn't prove anything because there is no proof that the package was sealed at the time of posting.
If you hold copyright or there is a creative commons copyright license already created for the content, then UKC cannot claim copyright for the information and are in legal breach of your copyright or the creative commons license by marking the content with a "©" and you could probably sue. I'm surprised that an entity the size of UKC has not got a legal representative to consider this for them, or maybe it has just never come up before or has been overlooked.
Side bar: For those who wish to use special characters on their posts like © or ® etc then you should look up ascii codes and use them by pressing the "alt" key whilst typing the relevant numbers on the 'numpad' to the right of the keyboard. A list of codes can be found here:
http://www.yellowpipe.com/yis/tools/ASCII-HTML-Characters/index.php (and many other places on the web). Interestingly different web pages and different browsers use slightly different codes depending on the language that they are written in so you won't find © as alt+169 as the linked page suggests. It is actually alt+184. Sometimes a little bit of trial and error around about the right value will find the code you are after."
My faith in UKC is restored. Thanks Alan.