It’s easy to connect one online document to another by means of a hyperlink. But to hyperlink your documents to someone else’s without permission, not to mention failure to properly attribute your sources or give credit to the authors, is unethical and quite possibly, illegal.
In 2008, GateHouse Media sued Boston.com, a subsidiary of The New York Times Co., for putting hyperlinks in its online documents directly to GateHouse articles and posting the headlines and first sentences of the articles on its own website. GateHouse claimed that The New York Times Co. was infringing on its copyrights and allowing users to bypass its homepage ads by means of this deep linking, or linking to a page on a website other than the homepage. A number of other legal cases have been filed concerning the legal acceptability of hyperlinking underlying content without owner permission.
The GateHouse case was settled before the courts had the opportunity to rule on the legal acceptability of hyperlinking. As of this writing in the United States, hyperlinking - including deep linking - is considered permissible under the “fair use” doctrine, which allows copyrighted works or portions thereof to be used for limited purpose without permission of its owners.
“Fair use” is generally determined based on the purpose and character of the user intent (commercial or non-profit), the nature of the work, the proportional amount of the work used in relation to the work as a whole, and the effect of the use of the work on its intended market or value.
However, in the United States, linking to content that is illegal or infringes against the intellectual property rights of others can be legally problematic. In other jurisdictions outside the United States, hyperlinking without permission and failure to attribute or properly credit the owners does constitute copyright infringement. And copyright infringement can result in huge damage awards against the infringers - both within and outside the United States.
As of this writing, the potential of infringing hyperlinks has not come up in the context of blogs. Simply stated, established news organizations have much deeper pockets than bloggers. Therefore, one can logically conclude that the financial and downstream moral effects of a copyright infringement award against a blogger can be potentially devastating, to the point of killing the blog. And that’s not all: infringers can also be enjoined against using the linked material and required to remove the links, in which case they would have been better off, financially and otherwise, scrapping the link in the first place.
The legal and ethical principles should be clear: Always get the permission of the owner of source material before using it in your blog; always correctly attribute that material or properly credit its creators; and always make sure that the material you’re linking to is infringement-free. If you don’t own it, linking to it is like helping yourself to someone else’s work without paying for it - and that’s stealing. Forearmed is forewarned and not everything goes…even online.
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Monday, July 27, 2009
Cloak and Blogger
It’s been a long-accepted truism that anything posted online is fair game for anyone else to comment on or respond to. And if it’s posted in a blog, it may also be fair game for a subpoena.
Earlier this month, New Jersey Superior Court Judge Louis Locascio ruled that for purposes of “shield law protection,” bloggers don’t count as journalists because “they are, many times, doing little more than shouting from atop a digital soapbox." So, in New Jersey at least, bloggers facing subpoenas for the identities of their “off the record” information can’t get away with refusing to name their sources.
“Shield laws,” which are on the books in thirty-six states and the District of Columbia, are state laws that protect the confidentiality of journalistic sources. (As of this posting, there is no federal provision for shield law protection.) Many of our most compelling news stories are attributed to “unnamed sources,” or sources who speak to journalists under a guarantee of anonymity. Without it, they often face loss of employment, social ostracism, and even threats of violence against themselves and their loved ones.
But even journalists who work for established news organizations at times face contempt of court, obstruction of justice, and other criminal charges for refusing to identify their sources. Former New York Times reporter and Pulitzer Prize winner Judith Miller, who refused to identify sources for stories (which she didn’t write) outing CIA operative Valerie Plame, couldn’t get away with confidentiality of source claims and spent 85 days in jail for contempt of court in 2005.
If an established news organization masthead and professional honors can’t protect you from a jail sentence, the lack of them definitely won’t keep you from facing the music. And your name will be the one in a news article-or a blog.
So if you’d rather have something to blog about besides the inside of a jail cell or solid orange vs. striped uniforms, don’t post anything that you aren’t prepared to testify about in court-including “naming names.”
Update: As of December 10, 2009, a federal shield law, The Free Flow of Information Act, has passed the Senate Judiciary Committee. It is pending in the full Senate and must then be reconciled with a different version passed in the House of Representatives.
Earlier this month, New Jersey Superior Court Judge Louis Locascio ruled that for purposes of “shield law protection,” bloggers don’t count as journalists because “they are, many times, doing little more than shouting from atop a digital soapbox." So, in New Jersey at least, bloggers facing subpoenas for the identities of their “off the record” information can’t get away with refusing to name their sources.
“Shield laws,” which are on the books in thirty-six states and the District of Columbia, are state laws that protect the confidentiality of journalistic sources. (As of this posting, there is no federal provision for shield law protection.) Many of our most compelling news stories are attributed to “unnamed sources,” or sources who speak to journalists under a guarantee of anonymity. Without it, they often face loss of employment, social ostracism, and even threats of violence against themselves and their loved ones.
But even journalists who work for established news organizations at times face contempt of court, obstruction of justice, and other criminal charges for refusing to identify their sources. Former New York Times reporter and Pulitzer Prize winner Judith Miller, who refused to identify sources for stories (which she didn’t write) outing CIA operative Valerie Plame, couldn’t get away with confidentiality of source claims and spent 85 days in jail for contempt of court in 2005.
If an established news organization masthead and professional honors can’t protect you from a jail sentence, the lack of them definitely won’t keep you from facing the music. And your name will be the one in a news article-or a blog.
So if you’d rather have something to blog about besides the inside of a jail cell or solid orange vs. striped uniforms, don’t post anything that you aren’t prepared to testify about in court-including “naming names.”
Update: As of December 10, 2009, a federal shield law, The Free Flow of Information Act, has passed the Senate Judiciary Committee. It is pending in the full Senate and must then be reconciled with a different version passed in the House of Representatives.
Keeping the FTC Away: Blog Endorsements
There are three rules that everyone seems to agree about regarding blogs: One, anything on a blog is fair game for responses from everyone else who sees it. Two, a blogger who wants to blog about his or her employer does so at risk of his or her job. And three, there are no other rules.
But the Federal Trade Commission is considering some new ones for those who endorse products and services in their blogs.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is one of the many government agencies in the United States that protect the public from harmful business practices such as false and deceptive advertising. Among its requirements is one that states that all publishers of articles and testimonials must disclose any connections that they or their writers have to the manufacturers and marketers of goods and services they discuss. The rule currently applies to newspapers, magazines, and other traditional or mainstream media.
If the FTC implements a controversial proposal currently under consideration, bloggers would also be required to disclose such connections. It can then get out of hand to such a point that anyone who chooses to write casually, “I like iPhones and think everyone should get one” in his own blog would have to mention any shares of stock he owns in Apple, any special discount or rebate he received from Apple to buy an iPhone, or any relationship he has to Steve Jobs.
The FTC would take this a step further and compel bloggers to disclose any free review copies they have received. This is a requirement that newspapers, magazines, and other media are not subject to. So if Apple gave a blogger a free iPhone, that blogger would have to disclose that information, whereas The New York Times and Wired magazine would not.
So with all of this compounded, now the case could be made that bloggers don’t count as journalists. The assumption can then be that they’re writing for fun, they don’t get paid, they aren’t working for media outlets, and their posts are usually seen by only a small number of people at most. But given that as of August, 2008, blogs received more than 77 million unique visitors in the United States according to Technorati, the blog-tracking website, it’s clear that blogging has serious potential to really spread the word about a product or service and as an after-effect, make or break reputations. So the FTC has a point about wanting to keep the blogosphere neutral, or at least frank, about products and services discussed within its purview by way of protecting consumers.
In conclusion, when you buy your next Mac, if you choose to blog about it, you need to protect yourself by mentioning any connection you have to its manufacturer or marketers. Otherwise, one bad Apple could damage the whole barrel of blogs.
But the Federal Trade Commission is considering some new ones for those who endorse products and services in their blogs.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is one of the many government agencies in the United States that protect the public from harmful business practices such as false and deceptive advertising. Among its requirements is one that states that all publishers of articles and testimonials must disclose any connections that they or their writers have to the manufacturers and marketers of goods and services they discuss. The rule currently applies to newspapers, magazines, and other traditional or mainstream media.
If the FTC implements a controversial proposal currently under consideration, bloggers would also be required to disclose such connections. It can then get out of hand to such a point that anyone who chooses to write casually, “I like iPhones and think everyone should get one” in his own blog would have to mention any shares of stock he owns in Apple, any special discount or rebate he received from Apple to buy an iPhone, or any relationship he has to Steve Jobs.
The FTC would take this a step further and compel bloggers to disclose any free review copies they have received. This is a requirement that newspapers, magazines, and other media are not subject to. So if Apple gave a blogger a free iPhone, that blogger would have to disclose that information, whereas The New York Times and Wired magazine would not.
So with all of this compounded, now the case could be made that bloggers don’t count as journalists. The assumption can then be that they’re writing for fun, they don’t get paid, they aren’t working for media outlets, and their posts are usually seen by only a small number of people at most. But given that as of August, 2008, blogs received more than 77 million unique visitors in the United States according to Technorati, the blog-tracking website, it’s clear that blogging has serious potential to really spread the word about a product or service and as an after-effect, make or break reputations. So the FTC has a point about wanting to keep the blogosphere neutral, or at least frank, about products and services discussed within its purview by way of protecting consumers.
In conclusion, when you buy your next Mac, if you choose to blog about it, you need to protect yourself by mentioning any connection you have to its manufacturer or marketers. Otherwise, one bad Apple could damage the whole barrel of blogs.
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
The New Phenomenon: Writer's Blog
Do most of your best blog ideas come when you’re away from your computer? Do you often find that they have slid out of your mind just in the short time it takes you to open your web browser and log on?
If so, you can take momentary heart in the fact that many other scribes of all shapes and sizes also suffer from the phenomenon of “writer’s block.” But if you want your readers to keep tuning in, you can’t afford to stay blocked. Your blog needs to be refreshed regularly with new material.
“Writer’s block” often results from two fears - fear of taking risks and fear of criticism - including our own.
When we’re not willing to accept the possibility of failure, we try very hard to get it right the first time. This often includes playing it safe, namely, sticking to methods and opinions that are “tried and true” – even though they’re no longer seen as “original” or “intriguing.” And we also inhibit ourselves with thin skins. It’s hard to ignore snarky criticism - especially when it comes from those who are considered “authorities.” And all we have to do to face our worst critics is to look in a mirror at our own reflections.
As a blogger, you especially need to be able to move past writer’s block and write. Forget about being perfect, correct, or eloquent - you just need to be timely. Your blog is only as attention-getting and earth-shifting as its most recent post. Respond to a comment, write about the funny thing that happened to you while switching on your computer, or type as you think - the important thing is to get something down. You are not going to be reviewed by Dorothy Parker or Roger Ebert.
And don’t try to be your own editor. It’s hard to be objective about your own writing. Wait until you finish a first draft before you go back and start looking for those red zigzags under misspelled words, incorrect punctuation, weird spacing gaps, and capital letters. Save fact-checking and rephrasing until you have those errors corrected.
But whatever you do, don’t wait. Get going and write. The only person whose permission you need is you.
If so, you can take momentary heart in the fact that many other scribes of all shapes and sizes also suffer from the phenomenon of “writer’s block.” But if you want your readers to keep tuning in, you can’t afford to stay blocked. Your blog needs to be refreshed regularly with new material.
“Writer’s block” often results from two fears - fear of taking risks and fear of criticism - including our own.
When we’re not willing to accept the possibility of failure, we try very hard to get it right the first time. This often includes playing it safe, namely, sticking to methods and opinions that are “tried and true” – even though they’re no longer seen as “original” or “intriguing.” And we also inhibit ourselves with thin skins. It’s hard to ignore snarky criticism - especially when it comes from those who are considered “authorities.” And all we have to do to face our worst critics is to look in a mirror at our own reflections.
As a blogger, you especially need to be able to move past writer’s block and write. Forget about being perfect, correct, or eloquent - you just need to be timely. Your blog is only as attention-getting and earth-shifting as its most recent post. Respond to a comment, write about the funny thing that happened to you while switching on your computer, or type as you think - the important thing is to get something down. You are not going to be reviewed by Dorothy Parker or Roger Ebert.
And don’t try to be your own editor. It’s hard to be objective about your own writing. Wait until you finish a first draft before you go back and start looking for those red zigzags under misspelled words, incorrect punctuation, weird spacing gaps, and capital letters. Save fact-checking and rephrasing until you have those errors corrected.
But whatever you do, don’t wait. Get going and write. The only person whose permission you need is you.
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Making the Case for White Space...Don't Blog Without It!
White space, or unused spaces in the electromagnetic spectrum that separate broadcast channels, is a hot issue, with technology companies pressing the FCC to make them available for commercial use, while TV broadcasters claim that their use will interfere with digital television broadcasts.
But another group of digital broadcasters needs white space as well-between the paragraphs of their blogs. Reading online text is a different experience from reading printed text-and your blog needs to allow for those differences.
When reading print, the words fade with the flow of the text in the reader’s mind. But when reading online text, the reader either quickly skims the text before moving to the next page, or reads the work more slowly than an electronic text, with more concentration on each word.
One important formatting difference between print and online text: whenever you start a new paragraph, separate it from your previous one by leaving a line of blank text between the two paragraphs.
Also, forget your grade school teacher’s admonitions about indenting the first line of each paragraph. Online readers find indentations distracting. Justify your entire text to the left margin with no indentations.
Finally, and probably most important: verbosity is a no-no. Paragraphs themselves need to be clearly written and to the point. Try to limit paragraphs to about six sentences. If you can cut a phrase or sentence without losing the gist of your message, by all means do it.
Keep your readers by making every word of your text, and the space around it, count.
But another group of digital broadcasters needs white space as well-between the paragraphs of their blogs. Reading online text is a different experience from reading printed text-and your blog needs to allow for those differences.
When reading print, the words fade with the flow of the text in the reader’s mind. But when reading online text, the reader either quickly skims the text before moving to the next page, or reads the work more slowly than an electronic text, with more concentration on each word.
One important formatting difference between print and online text: whenever you start a new paragraph, separate it from your previous one by leaving a line of blank text between the two paragraphs.
Also, forget your grade school teacher’s admonitions about indenting the first line of each paragraph. Online readers find indentations distracting. Justify your entire text to the left margin with no indentations.
Finally, and probably most important: verbosity is a no-no. Paragraphs themselves need to be clearly written and to the point. Try to limit paragraphs to about six sentences. If you can cut a phrase or sentence without losing the gist of your message, by all means do it.
Keep your readers by making every word of your text, and the space around it, count.
The Nuke Power of a Blog
Today, the opinion of a blogger can send corporations, politicians, and even the director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory looking for shelters from cyberspace bombs.
Online publishing was once known as the “alternative” means of getting your opinion out. If you couldn’t get your article printed on the Op-Ed page of The New York Times, or acceptance editors sent it back to you with a letter stating “This material is not suitable for our current needs,” you went ahead and logically placed it on your own site.
Dr. G. Peter Nanos was the subject of vitriolic posts on the laboratory’s blog
(www.lanl-the-real-story.blogspot.com). This venom came from users demanding his resignation for closing many areas of the laboratory after two false security alarms. See the story at http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/01/national/01alamos.html?th&emc=th.
And let’s not forget Mark Jen, who was fired from Google in January, 2005 for discussing his job too freely in his blog.
The blog format lends itself to whistle-blowing and sensitive information spillover, simply because it’s uncontrollable. Blogs have even gained in popularity in Iraq and other parts of the world that are already subject to heavy censorship by government and other officials. They are seen as an invaluable tool for circumventing established barriers to freedom of the press.
But should bloggers be allowed completely free rein? Is it really desirable that every officeholder and executive decision be subject to the agenda of a blogger, especially one with a personal agenda that doesn’t involve the long-term outcome of a careless post?
The answer awaits…we’re still finding out!
Online publishing was once known as the “alternative” means of getting your opinion out. If you couldn’t get your article printed on the Op-Ed page of The New York Times, or acceptance editors sent it back to you with a letter stating “This material is not suitable for our current needs,” you went ahead and logically placed it on your own site.
Dr. G. Peter Nanos was the subject of vitriolic posts on the laboratory’s blog
(www.lanl-the-real-story.blogspot.com). This venom came from users demanding his resignation for closing many areas of the laboratory after two false security alarms. See the story at http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/01/national/01alamos.html?th&emc=th.
And let’s not forget Mark Jen, who was fired from Google in January, 2005 for discussing his job too freely in his blog.
The blog format lends itself to whistle-blowing and sensitive information spillover, simply because it’s uncontrollable. Blogs have even gained in popularity in Iraq and other parts of the world that are already subject to heavy censorship by government and other officials. They are seen as an invaluable tool for circumventing established barriers to freedom of the press.
But should bloggers be allowed completely free rein? Is it really desirable that every officeholder and executive decision be subject to the agenda of a blogger, especially one with a personal agenda that doesn’t involve the long-term outcome of a careless post?
The answer awaits…we’re still finding out!
And Your Point Is?
With any piece of writing, it is absolutely essential to establish your theme from the outset. Whether you are writing about whether the United States should continue the war with Iraq, why the Yankees lost to the Red Sox in last year’s playoffs, or who The Donald should say “You’re fired!” to next, you need to make that clear right away. Especially when your audience is reading your work at a resolution of 1024 x 768 pixels.
As a blogger, you need to make your point early in your piece — I’d say by the third paragraph at the latest. Your readers shouldn’t have to scroll down their screens to discover that you think the war is pointless or the Yankees’ defense was weak or that Omarosa should be the next to go.
Use the scrollbar at the side of your post screen as a benchmark. If you reach the end of the screen before you reach your point, it’s time to go back and edit. Look for things that can be moved to a later paragraph, reworded, or deleted entirely. The maxim “Less is more” should always be your primary guideline.
In 1787, our founders made good use of this guideline. They had decided to replace our original constitution, the Articles of Confederation, which had resulted in a dysfunctional government unable to carry out many of its basic functions, with a new constitution.
Although the need for a new constitution was very clear, it was also very controversial. What powers it granted to the federal government and the states were subjects of furious fights at the Constitutional Convention that was held that year, in the state legislatures, and among the people. So the new federal government needed to explain and justify its existence and purpose, in clear, concise, and organized terms.
This is the opening of the Articles of Confederation:
To all to whom these Presents shall come, we the undersigned Delegates of the States affixed to our Names send greeting.
Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union between the States of New Hampshire, Massachusetts bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia.
Article I. The Stile of this Confederacy shall be "The United States of America."
Article II. Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.
Article III. The said States hereby severally enter into a firm league of friendship with each other, for their common defense, the security of their liberties, and their mutual and general welfare, binding themselves to assist each other, against all force offered to, or attacks made upon them, or any of them, on account of religion, sovereignty, trade, or any other pretense whatever.
And this is the Preamble to our current Constitution:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Notice how that single paragraph, at the beginning of the document, accomplishes — in just one sentence and fifty-two words — what it takes the Articles of Confederation two paragraphs of opening text followed by three articles to announce, namely, what its writers intend to accomplish in this document.
221 years later, with over 77 million blogs in existence, brevity and conciseness in blog posts are more crucial than ever. If your readers are scratching their heads while looking for your main point as they scroll down, they will leave your blog. So get there fast, and keep them interested in reading your messages.
As a blogger, you need to make your point early in your piece — I’d say by the third paragraph at the latest. Your readers shouldn’t have to scroll down their screens to discover that you think the war is pointless or the Yankees’ defense was weak or that Omarosa should be the next to go.
Use the scrollbar at the side of your post screen as a benchmark. If you reach the end of the screen before you reach your point, it’s time to go back and edit. Look for things that can be moved to a later paragraph, reworded, or deleted entirely. The maxim “Less is more” should always be your primary guideline.
In 1787, our founders made good use of this guideline. They had decided to replace our original constitution, the Articles of Confederation, which had resulted in a dysfunctional government unable to carry out many of its basic functions, with a new constitution.
Although the need for a new constitution was very clear, it was also very controversial. What powers it granted to the federal government and the states were subjects of furious fights at the Constitutional Convention that was held that year, in the state legislatures, and among the people. So the new federal government needed to explain and justify its existence and purpose, in clear, concise, and organized terms.
This is the opening of the Articles of Confederation:
To all to whom these Presents shall come, we the undersigned Delegates of the States affixed to our Names send greeting.
Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union between the States of New Hampshire, Massachusetts bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia.
Article I. The Stile of this Confederacy shall be "The United States of America."
Article II. Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.
Article III. The said States hereby severally enter into a firm league of friendship with each other, for their common defense, the security of their liberties, and their mutual and general welfare, binding themselves to assist each other, against all force offered to, or attacks made upon them, or any of them, on account of religion, sovereignty, trade, or any other pretense whatever.
And this is the Preamble to our current Constitution:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Notice how that single paragraph, at the beginning of the document, accomplishes — in just one sentence and fifty-two words — what it takes the Articles of Confederation two paragraphs of opening text followed by three articles to announce, namely, what its writers intend to accomplish in this document.
221 years later, with over 77 million blogs in existence, brevity and conciseness in blog posts are more crucial than ever. If your readers are scratching their heads while looking for your main point as they scroll down, they will leave your blog. So get there fast, and keep them interested in reading your messages.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)