In order to place a legally "binding" takedown notice in the US (these rules may be different in France), you must first ask nicely and be ignored. So, if the takedown notice is the way you want to go, you must first contact the infringer in any case.
When you do contact the infringer, it is equally valid to either offer him several options or to offer him only the one option (takedown). So, in other words, you can send him a letter saying something to the effect of "You may either pay me at these rates OR you may take down my work", OR you can send a letter saying "you must take down my work immediately". For the legal letter to have teeth, you cannot send a single letter saying "you must pay me" and, if that is ignored or rejected, immediately send the legal letter. If you opt for the "you must pay me" option first, without mentioning the takedown option, then you must send a second letter. This is my understanding of how the process works.
That wording on the usenet copy really weakens your case. You voluntarily permit free reprint rights. I don't know if it is possible to "prove" or "disprove" whether a site is making "profit" off your work. I think you lost a major battle before you even thought to fight it.
HOWEVER, you are still entitled to credit, and they stripped you of that, so you still have some standing. I think. At least in the US.
As for rates, if you decide to send him a bill: While reprints are normally less valuable than first rights by far, I would go ahead and bill him a "first rights" rate. And I, personally, seldom write professonally for magazines/websites for less than $1/word. However, 20 cents per word is considered a very good rate by most; 20 cents is certainly a professional rate. That's your call.
(no subject)
When you do contact the infringer, it is equally valid to either offer him several options or to offer him only the one option (takedown). So, in other words, you can send him a letter saying something to the effect of "You may either pay me at these rates OR you may take down my work", OR you can send a letter saying "you must take down my work immediately". For the legal letter to have teeth, you cannot send a single letter saying "you must pay me" and, if that is ignored or rejected, immediately send the legal letter. If you opt for the "you must pay me" option first, without mentioning the takedown option, then you must send a second letter. This is my understanding of how the process works.
That wording on the usenet copy really weakens your case. You voluntarily permit free reprint rights. I don't know if it is possible to "prove" or "disprove" whether a site is making "profit" off your work. I think you lost a major battle before you even thought to fight it.
HOWEVER, you are still entitled to credit, and they stripped you of that, so you still have some standing. I think. At least in the US.
As for rates, if you decide to send him a bill: While reprints are normally less valuable than first rights by far, I would go ahead and bill him a "first rights" rate. And I, personally, seldom write professonally for magazines/websites for less than $1/word. However, 20 cents per word is considered a very good rate by most; 20 cents is certainly a professional rate. That's your call.
This one's tough... I wish you luck.