Slashdot Mirror
Who Owns Weblog Content?
dirvish writes "Information Week has a story discussing copyright issues and legal rights associated with employee blogs and RSS readers. Recently, some companies have come out with formal weblog policies and others have fired employees for inappropriate blogging. With an increase in official company blogs, and some large companies like Microsoft and Google offering popular blogging services, the issues become even more clouded. Some bloggers are beginning to speak out about corporate and government control, others would probably prefer to not risk their jobs."
Mark Cuban's Blog - owner of the Dallas Mavericks ...
Hulk SMASH Celiac Disease
On a slightly-related note: Has anybody else noticed that Information Week has been getting awfully thin these past few issues? Trouble on the horizon?
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
This is really simple. I don't talk about my job on my blog. I don't write blog entries from work. My blog is not hosted by my employer. They have nothing to do with my blog, and if they want to try to exercise any control over my blog, they can go to hell.
How am I supposed to fit a pithy, relevant quote into 120 characters?
and federally regulated break time is given, an employer can restrict whatever non-workrelated activities they wish. Especially those carried about using company equipment.
People should really treat blogs just like anything that they would say in public. Most companies have IP agreements, or nondisclosure agreements. If an employee posts something that violates that agreement, then the company can ask them to take it down. People have a right to talk about their personal lives, but when you work for someone else, you usually have to agree not to disclose private information about them. Blogs are just a natural extension of that rule.
I store my recipes online (the way nature intended)
A blog is no different than a personal website; folks have had those since the dawn of the web.
Read your employment agreement; if you're still not sure talk to your HR folks. Better safe than sorry.
What's the difference between a blog and another personal website? You should be able to say whatever you want on it ...
If an employee blogs for or as a representative of her company, the company owns the material.
If an employee blogs on her own time, and on matters unrelated to the company, the author owns the material.
If an employee blogs on her own time, but on matters related to the company and identifying herself with the company, she owns the material but will likely face consequences.
Problem is that they usually aren't spelled out and you just have to use common sense. Sadly most people don't have common sense and certainly don't think of the consequences of their actions until it's too late.
on my employer's weblog anymore than I would post my opinion on my employer's bulletin boards.
I think that if you want to avoid being quoted as saying stuff, or avoid having someone steal your ideas, then maybe you should choose another medium.
As opposed to what? Employement in the pre-union days of the early 20th century, where workers were little more than chattel and their minds didn't matter? Orgainization was seen as a step towards communism and fought hard and bloody. Now you just post anonymously about how your thoughts aren't your own.
Blog anonymously and with a healthy dose of paranoia.
No, cheapskate, hire a lawyer to advise you on protecting any ideas of your own which you think may be of significant value. If you've come up with a zinger which may make your fortune, you don't have to stay with your employer and bitch about it, go take a risk on your own and leave the job.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
People too stupid to use pseudonyms get what they deserve.
People who let their employers violate their civil liberties get what they deserve.
People who arrogantly deal out advice for other people get what they deserve.
I am from a small, grease-loving country in the north called Ca-na-da.
This is all obvious, isn't it?
1. Anything you publish will be considered by people considering hiring you. Therefore, publish only what you would be proud of.
2. Companies expect that their employees will not disclose confidential company information. Doing so can get you disciplined or fired. Never mind whether they could get a court order stopping you -- your job will end long before anything like that happens.
3. Companies expect that their employees will publicly support the company, or at least not publicly embarrass it. Doing so can get you disciplined or fired.
4. Materials written on company time or hosted on company equipment may be the property of your employer.
None of this is new. The only thing blogs add to this picture is that more of us now have the opportunity to publish.
"We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
If you don't like your employer's attitude on these issues, you're still free to walk, you don't need a pair of ruby slippers to click three times and wish you were home. Enough people have the guts to walk out on an oppressive employer they may get the message, particularly if you mention it in an exit interview.
I've disagreed with employers and managers (who may or may not represent the employer above their own ego) and spoken my mind a number of times. It's usually best to form a plan to address grievances rather than uttering disparaging remarks in the break room or anonymously on the web or in the news. If there's nothing to be gained then have the intelligence to go. I truly despise hearing people whine about how they hate what's going on in their workplace, but don't do anything about it.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Remember anon.penet.fi? As soon as the heat came down, so did the veil of anonymity.
$0.02,
ptd
I'm an animal lover -- they're delicious!
I know it's a wildly unpopular concept with a lot of the tech crowd, but that's the sort of thing that unions were created to prevent. You think EA would be raping it's employees if it's workers were unionized?
Not a fan of unions myself, but history suggests it'll get results.
Look at the bottom of the page:
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2004 OSTG.
However, I just don't talk about work. I could write several books about what goes on there, but what would it do for me in the end? If I need therapy because of work, then I should see a shrink, not blab about it to people who don't care anyway. Stick to politics: it pisses people off AND it's easy to pick sides in a fight.
Don't be a looter...and yes, I know that it's spelled with an "A" instead of an "E".
So why shouldn't I be allowed to voluntarily enter into a contract that restricts my own speech? Should I not be allowed that freedom?
Come play Heroes of Might and Magic Mini online.
- Blogging on company time
- Blogging bad about your company
- Blogging about how much you hate your job
- Blogging out information that should stay behind company doors
I think you're asking for trouble. Your freedom of speech covers your political muscle not libel or slander. As an employee, there should be some respect for the boundaries expected of you. If you're fairly sure you have a right to say something, be sure to follow the same rules to which journalists are supposedly accountable: integrity, truth, and accuracy. No one should be able to fire you for that. But, if you're expected to maintain a sense of decorum or have signed a disclosure agreement, maybe you should respect the rights and privacy of the company or those about whom you're blogging. Otherwise, do something to obfuscate your identity--but bloggers love to be exhibitionists.Personally, I think blogging is a bit of a strange habit because I'm an introvert and I don't think the world wants or cares to know about my feelings, political orientation, or how much I loathe/love my job, family, pets, or celebrities.
I do like to post occassional anecdotes, etc. but as a rule, I try to respect others and not type something I wouldn't want them to read. Or, if it's unflattering, I'll try to find some way to not assassinate their character but to find fault in the action.
The world is full of too many myopic opinionated people who care little about the effects of their words or actions. I think, we as internet denizens, should be careful to promote change with careful and constructive criticism and express ourselves with honesty without malice--even on blogs.
BTW: Bloggers suck. (Just kidding)
I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...
So why shouldn't I be allowed to voluntarily enter into a contract that restricts my own speech? Should I not be allowed that freedom?
For the same reason you shouldn't be allowed to enter into a contract that makes you a slave.
-Colin
Those are indeed your rights. Of course, your employer can also fire you, sue you, or promote you, either because of your blog or without knowing about it. Those are your employer's rights.
You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
The colonial experience is all about "multinational" corporations. How do you think trade and settlement were organized and funded in those early days? The Hudson's Bay Company, founded in 1670, is still a going concern.
Example usage:
"I don't know why Microsoft keeps touting Digital Rights Management--everyone knows obsecurity is no security at all."
Anyone second the motion?
Si la vida me da palo, yo la voy a soportar Si la vida me da palo, yo la voy a espabilar
I recently aquired a virtual server in the US, and under "Unacceptable Content" in the terms of service, it said the following:
As a non-US citizen this strikes me as frighteningly extreme. On the other hand, this is a country where people can be abducted by the state, imprisoned without charge and tortured (legally, according to the attorney general), so if I were running an Internet service in the US, I'd probably be reluctant to argue my clients' free speech rights too strenuously.
Let's assume (because I can't be bothered with research) that these clauses are becoming commonplace in hosting agreements. Well, you could always host your political website yourself. Except I imagine retail ISPs and other upstream bandwidth providers will also want to be seen to be doing their bit for homeland security, and adjust their TOS documents accordingly.
So where will you go for free political debate in the US? Call in to Rush Limbaugh? Meet in the dead of night in a cellar behind a cast-iron door with a peephole and a large armed man asking for the password ("crossfire")?