Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Internet Government The Courts News

12 Laws Every Blogger Needs to Know 100

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.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

12 Laws Every Blogger Needs to Know

Comments Filter:
  • 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
  • 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 :)
  • 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).
  • by UbuntuDupe ( 970646 ) * on Thursday May 03, 2007 @05:52PM (#18980067) Journal
    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.
  • Re:Newtonian Laws (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 03, 2007 @06:13PM (#18980387)
    My blog ( http://johnbokma.com/ [johnbokma.com] ) has over 16,000 daily visitors and makes some nice money. So there go 2 out of 3 wrong. You might be right with 2 because English is not my native language. On the other hand a lot of people seem to be very happy with my Apache on XP tutorial.

    Don't assume that your personal opinion reflects reality. And if that hurts, join Digg.

After a number of decimal places, nobody gives a damn.

Working...