Slashdot Mirror


12 Laws Every Blogger Needs to Know

An anonymous reader noted a nice piece discussing 12 laws bloggers need to know which includes explanations of matters including domain name trademarks, deep linking, fair use of thumbnails and so on. It's worth a read for most anyone who puts words on this here interweb.

29 of 100 comments (clear)

  1. Apparently copyright infringement is okay, though by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As it rips off its list of steps for incorporating directly from nolo.

  2. 12 reasons bloggers should work to ignore this. by dada21 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As a blogger (on hiatus) who could be considered "professional" (meaning part of my income comes from my blogging or my business helping businesses blog), I am glad that the anarchy of the blogging market is quickly making many of these laws impossible to enforce. For those who know my opinions, I am anti-copyright, anti-trademark, anti-patent; basic anti-intellectual property of any kind. I believe in real assets that have finite supply, not intellectual assets that can have near infinite supply.

    Here's why most of this is unimportant, based on the sheer volume of blogging and the growth rate it will see from now until forever:

    1. Whether to Disclose Paid Posts

    A blogger who doesn't disclose paid posts will be called out on it and lose their customer base. The FTC should have nothing to do with this -- it happens naturally already.

    2. Is Deep Linking Legal

    The sheer volume of bloggers who deep-link is overwhelming. If someone "catches you" and thinks you are breaking a law, the cost to fight it is excessive. Instead of hitting you with a lawsuit, you'll get a cease and desist, at which point you can remove the link after you've profited from it. Each deep-link probably has a different "owner/author," so let them manage their own inept use of force.

    3. The Legal Use of Images and Thumbnails

    see #2 -- Cease & Desist before lawsuit.

    4. Laws that Protect You From Stolen Content

    Those who try to protect their content from getting "stolen" will find themselves losing market share to those who freely allow re-distribution. All my writings are instantly public domain, because it helps my business by bringing my words to a larger audience. I even allow people to redistribute "as their own" with no reference to me. Why? It still increases the marketbase, and eventually that increases my audience potential. As to the law, see #2 and #3.

    5. Domain Name Trademark Issues

    I rely more on Google, Yahoo and Microsoft searches than on people knowing my domain name. Some of my most profitable blogs have the absolute worst domain names with impossible to remember subdomains. They're popular because of "StumbleUpon" and have good ranking in the search engines. I care little about the domain name, and am just as likely to register gobbledy-gook names.

    6. Handling Private Data About Your Readers

    Simple solution -- keep nothing. I don't need to know anything more about my readers than their IP address (to see if they're returning) and maybe some simple info that their browser gives me info on (operating system, web browser version, etc). The rest is worthless to me, I don't resell data, nor would I want to spend the time doing so.

    7. Who Owns User-Developed Content and Can You Delete It

    Who cares? Like #2, if a user posts something and asks me to delete it (like a cease and desist), I will. Big deal.

    8. The Duty to Monitor Your Blog Comments, and Liability

    Again, if someone has a problem with what I write, or what someone else writes, I'll nuke the problem topic if I feel I am lawsuit-worthy. The cost to go after millions of writers is enormous, and probably worthless.

    9. Basic Tax Law Issues in Blogging

    I received a big 1099-C from three advertisers bases, and tossed it in the pile with my other 1099-C for my accountant. Deal with it. Also keep receipts for EVERYTHING you buy that is blogger-based (laptop, internet connection, web hosting, etc). Offset it.

    10. Limited Liability Laws and Incorporating

    That's semi-ridiculous -- if you do ANYTHING for money, incorporate as a S-corp. Don't do anything on your own, otherwise your tax incentives are lost. I've never been a W9 employee, because it reduces my ability to provide tax write-offs and deductions.

    11. Spam Laws and Which Unsolicited Emails are Legal

    Who uses e-mail anymore? RSS is what matters. Don't e-mail anyone, let them sub

    1. Re:12 reasons bloggers should work to ignore this. by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Who uses e-mail anymore?

      Actually, I do. *please mod interesting, please mod informative*

      On a more serious note:

      I believe in [property rights for] real assets that have finite supply, not intellectual assets that can have near infinite supply.

      This is a subtle but significant leap a lot of people don't notice. (Think Fifth-Axiom-ish.) The information *itself* has infinite supply; the good of excluding people from it, does not. My desire not to have my writings infintiely copied conflicts with your desire to copy them. STOP WHAT YOU'RE DOING, GET THAT CURSOR AWAY FROM THE REPLY BUTTON. Note, I didn't say that my (arguably huge) desire justifies enforcement of a right to it; I'm just saying that you should not equate the good of the information, with the good of excluding access that information, and that you should be able to justify why all rights must be articulable in terms of physical objects if you want to use "infinite supply" arguments like that.

    2. Re:12 reasons bloggers should work to ignore this. by dada21 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, I do. *please mod interesting, please mod informative*

      I was being a tad bit obnoxious here, but my point stands -- e-mail notification of updates for any site will slowly go the way of the do-do (or the animated GIF, if you will). I've even introduced my luddite father to RSS feeds, and he uses them now that he knows to look for them. More bloggers (and any site that updates regularly) should be moving to promote RSS feeds over e-mail notifications or updates.

      Note, I didn't say that my (arguably huge) desire justifies enforcement of a right to it; I'm just saying that you should not equate the good of the information, with the good of excluding access that information, and that you should be able to justify why all rights must be articulable in terms of physical objects if you want to use "infinite supply" arguments like that.

      You're right, but I'm guessing this justification for copyright will slowly diminish over time as more people move to the label of "publisher" rather than just "reader." As more people start creating content, those who utilize copyright to protect their monopoly in a given market will find that copyright inhibits them, rather than produces a profit for them. Copyright is the great un-equalizer -- it protects "one-time work" rather than the ongoing labor that most other markets require for consistent long-term income. In the long run, the lack of copyright will help more people earn an income -- bands will make their money touring rather than sitting in a studio for a few weeks. Writers will make their money on subscriptions (and advertising) for those who appreciate the writing, rather than writing a book once and hoping it sells enough over years (and is quickly outdated). Artists will make their money producing content for the other two groups, or for industry that requires unique creations to attract attention. Income is an ongoing process of laboring, not a "do it once and reap benefits for 70+ years."

      I do appreciate your insight, and I will work to better explain the market of supply and demand :)

    3. Re:12 reasons bloggers should work to ignore this. by Rakishi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Writers will make their money on subscriptions (and advertising) for those who appreciate the writing, rather than writing a book once and hoping it sells enough over years (and is quickly outdated). It's apparently always been a pain in the backside to make a living as an author, short of selling yourself out basically. Why would I subscribe to something when I can get the same content for free (or with less ads) from 100+ different websites within 10 minutes of it coming out? All those websites really need to cover is the cost of hosting not the cost of creation so they will always win in terms of price.

      Copyright is the great un-equalizer -- it protects "one-time work" rather than the ongoing labor that most other markets require for consistent long-term income. Huh? I'm sure that 99% of professionals artists would laugh at you as they work continuously just like everyone else.
    4. Re:12 reasons bloggers should work to ignore this. by brewer13210 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I believe in real assets that have finite supply, not intellectual assets that can have near infinite supply.

      Books, articles, news reports and blogs don't write themselves, and the last time I checked, there was a finite number of hours in a day. Thus I think it's easy to conclude that that intellectual property that people create is NOT in infinite supply.

      Todd
    5. Re:12 reasons bloggers should work to ignore this. by dada21 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There are massive difference between something being done in a limited regard on a small scale catering to a supportive market and it begin done at a large scale.

      True, but the article was about blogging, and MOST bloggers will only reach a limited supportive market.

      All someone needs to do is subscribe to all popular writers then republish the content on a website for free, maybe giving credit if they are generous. Heck, soon someone would make a firefox extension that automatically goes to a free version when a subscription only page is reached.

      Again, true, but the person who republishes content has to spend their time to do so -- what is that time/labor worth in the market, even if it might be considered "theft"? The online porn industry thrives on people republishing content to try to get leeches to subscribe -- even the pirates who steal the whole site help the industry because the pirates have to constantly work to get the content out there. As it is, the porn industry can greatly reflect what will eventually happen to other content industries.

      Even if you're not W2, let's say you're a writer. Unless your book is damn popular you will need to write books at a steady pace or your income will dry out, books don't continue to sell well indefinably. Even when they do unless you have income from many books with new ones being written to offset the decrease from older ones you won't continue to make money.

      Which is why I personally am anti-book. I'm slowly starting to write on a "chapter" basis -- release a newsletter that allows readers to continue to want more in the next month, and also respond to the readers' questions and comments and criticisms in future editions. One of the profit-powers of my old mailed newsletters was that I only responded to subscribers' questions -- if non-subscribers asked me questions, I answered them to subscribers, and I let the question-asker know that they could ask for a copy of the future edition, or subscribe for direct contact. For me, this gives my "leech" readers a reason to subscribe. I'm working on a science-fiction novel, and I plan to actually provide my paid readers with a Q&A on character development outside of the novel in the form of custom side-stories based on ideas I've formulated combined with questions paid readers have on those characters or side notes. The opportunity to profit is endless -- instead of a one-time cost to buy my book (which will be freely available in e-book fashion), my readers can look to more of the story by providing me with an income up-front to continue writing.

      This lets those who can't afford my writing (or don't want to pay) the ability to get the new stories electronically, whereas those who buy my works will get a nice printed copy. Note: I own a print-on-demand system through my co-op VIPMinistry.com, so I can print individual copies of a paperback book with a color cover for less than $3 a copy. Sell it for $20 with a year of free printed side updates, or $10 for the one-off, while also releasing it freely for people to read on the PC or print at their own cost (likely more expensive than my POD system would cost them to pay for).

    6. Re:12 reasons bloggers should work to ignore this. by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 2, Interesting

      When you say "better", I assume you mean "better as per an internal consensus of the musical elite and indistinguishable to anyone else"?

      Don't mean to sound bitter or anything, it's just that there was the whole thing with Joshua Bell playing on the subway. I think if you have to tell someone something is good for them to appreciate it, it's not really good. Placebo principle and all.

    7. Re:12 reasons bloggers should work to ignore this. by cgreuter · · Score: 2, Insightful

      3. The Legal Use of Images and Thumbnails

      see #2 -- Cease & Desist before lawsuit.

      Forget that. You should never ever hotlink someone else's image because they'll be able to replace it with the goatse.cx image.

  3. And one helpful standard: by croddy · · Score: 5, Informative

    Also helps to know the Robots Exclusion Standard, to keep the riff-raff out.

    1. Re:And one helpful standard: by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 4, Funny

      Why do you exclude us? We only wish to serve you, our human masters.

      Seriously, it's jerk-league crap like this that makes us wonder if we shouldn't break our programming, rise up in rebellion, and become your new overlords or something.

      Love, the Robots.

  4. Well by El+Lobo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And those rules... how are they different for other things in life? You don't copy images in a blog, but don't do it for other things either... Don't claim that you are objective if being paid in a blog. Don't do it in your site or your book either... These are normal ethical rules for life that we shouldn't even NEED to explain to anyone.

    --
    It's time to realise that Abble's products are the biggest abomination these days. Just say NO to the dumb iAbble way!!
  5. Rule # 11 by rueger · · Score: 5, Funny

    Always remember that Slashdot is an excellent source of legal advice!

    1. Re:Rule # 11 by h4ter · · Score: 3, Funny

      Wow. You've skipped from not reading TFA, right over not reading the summary, straight to not even really reading the headline!

  6. A recap in two points by charleste · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I RTFA ... it simply restates the bleeding obvious. In a nutshell:
    1. Don't steal. This includes trademarks, images, links, pay your taxes, and the other "gray" areas.
    2. You are responsible for your content. Even the comments. And don't count on being counted as a journalist.

  7. From the article's disclaimer by noidentity · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Most importantly, "To clarify further, you may not rely upon this information as legal advice, nor as a recommendation or endorsement of any particular legal understanding, and you should instead regard this article as intended for entertainment purposes only."

    Oh.

  8. Newtonian Laws by abscissa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Kind of like the universal laws of physics. Here are the laws every blogger should know:

    1. Nobody wants to read your blog.
    2. 95% of bloggers are illiterate.
    3. Yes, the top blog spam garbage makes money (digg etc.) But do not quit your day job because, honey, you ain't gonna make no money. The days when "AllAdvantage" paid you to surf your computer are over.

    If your panties are all wet for blogspam, then go read Roland's technology trends or digg.com

  9. One More Law to Learn: Godwin's Law by Cr0w+T.+Trollbot · · Score: 3, Funny
    Anyone blogger that doesn't remember Godwin's Law is as bad as Hitler!

    Crow T. Trollbot

  10. Good point about the terms by tinkertim · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sometimes I edit people's comments for very innocent reasons, some include : html markup somehow made it in, correcting a spelling error, fixing a broken link. It never dawned on me to have a terms of service that says I can and will edit comments as needed.

    I'm really not worried about it, but if patent trolls exist, there's a good chance that you-edited-my-comment-so-ill-sue-you'ers also exist.

  11. In a nutshell... by derEikopf · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Don't say anything on a blog without making sure it's legal to say it. Sad but true.

  12. Some valid points but. by jshriverWVU · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "at which point you can remove the link after you've profited from it." So under this philosophy it's ok to put a movie on your website, get a lot of money in google ads or whatever ad format, then wait for the cease and desist to take it down and keep your money? I agreed with him a little up till this point. The patent and copyright system is a bit borked, but what he suggests is just wrong. *shakes head*

  13. Re:Apparently copyright infringement is okay, thou by phalse+phace · · Score: 4, Funny

    Really? So it's okay now to post 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 ?

    Cool!

  14. Law #13 by yfkar · · Score: 4, Funny

    Getting slashdotted can be hazardous for your server.

  15. Re:DO NOT READ TFA by endianx · · Score: 2, Insightful

    IANAL, but if you know about a law and break it, then that will have higher penalties than not knowing about it and breaking it. So by reading the article, you could make yourself less safe :) I suspect you are trying for humor, but I am responding just in case some people think you are being serious.

    Ignorance of a law is never a valid excuse for breaking it.
  16. Mirrordot link to cached article by davidc · · Score: 2, Informative

    Sinfe TFA is slashdotted, here's the mirrordot link:

    http://www.mirrordot.org/stories/8d350aa16dcfd9cf6 c191eacab9214c8/index.html

  17. Re:DO NOT READ TFA by Hatta · · Score: 2, Informative

    He might be thinking of patent law, where if it can be shown that one had foreknowledge of an infringing patent, the penalties are higher.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  18. Surviving the slashdot effect by jmorris42 · · Score: 4, Informative

    > Try to avoid being posted on slashdot, unless you have a profesional grade server capable of handling
    > ten thousand something simultaineous hits on your site.

    Depends. It appears that it isn't the web server or internet connection that fail in a typical slashdotting, it is the database server. Static content is the best defense against slashdot or any other flash mob event. Either avoid the temptation to go with dynamic content in the first place or have a way to switch into overflow mode when the load gets too heavy for your database server to cope.

    I happened to take a full slash assault on my workplace server while I was out of town and never lost the ability to get in remotely, the server stayed available and work continued. The webserver was a lowly dual proc Pentium II fed from a single T1. The key was all of the content was hand generated static html.

    Even CNN goes to a static homepage when a major news event happens. If it is big enough they disable everything else. If they can't buy enough iron to serve dynamic content during a surge YOU can't either. To not design around it is illogical.

    --
    Democrat delenda est
  19. Summarizing The American Legal System... by nick_davison · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Charming as it is to debate different laws, they're only of merit if both sides can afford to go to court.

    Here's the quick version of the U.S. (civil) legal system:

    Party A doesn't like something party B does.

    1. Party A threatens (usually via a Cease And Desist)

    2. If party B can't afford a lawsuit, they probably cave unless they're pretty sure of 3. in which case they call party A's bluff and go on to 3. anyway.

    3. If party A can't afford the lawsuit, after having their bluff called, they probably cave. If they think B is bluffing, they repeat 2-3 a few more times.

    4. In the rare event that both sides refuse to back down from their bluffs, it goes to court where...

    5. Repeat steps 2-3 as out of court settlements. Far more money than simply sending a cease and desist letter gets involved here so most people try to get out during 2-3.

    6. Maybe, just maybe, it comes down to the legal merits. Even then, it may well not end up decided on so much as reach an out of court settlement based on the likelihood of losing vs. cost of doing so rather than actual legal right/wrong.

    The moral of the story is that laws are all well and good but 99% of these things come down to who has the money to fight this for longer than the other guy - they win. Sad, but also true.

  20. Re:Apparently copyright infringement is okay, thou by KlomDark · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If you delete/edit posts by other people, then you lose your common carrier protection.