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.
As it rips off its list of steps for incorporating directly from nolo.
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
Also helps to know the Robots Exclusion Standard, to keep the riff-raff out.
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!!
Always remember that Slashdot is an excellent source of legal advice!
Three Squirrels
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.
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
Crow T. Trollbot
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.
"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*
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!
Getting slashdotted can be hazardous for your server.
> 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
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.