Blogging 101 - Don't be a user

Karen  "*facepalm*"??? 

My first class I EVER attended on how to do our websites, the instructor showed us how to go to the Columbus Zoo, the Columbus Clippers, the Columbus Zoo... The (and I do mean capitol... or capital? big T) The Ohio State University and take their respective logos so we could "promote" them on our website.  This was someone ahead of the curve on technology. There is nothing new about feeding misinformation to those in our industry.  I remember thinking ... gee the Internet has changed things since I was in college.   And it did seem like rules were different with ordinary people able to "publish."  I think when I questioned it I was told it was OK because we were promoting them.... I have heard that from others more recently, it is OK you are doing a message for their business, ok to use their logos, their photos from their site.

I know I asked for and got permission to use another agents photo on something I had listed once.  There was a snow storm or something and I got a whole set of great photos in a day or two.  She was very gracious. I paid for professional photographs a few years ago and when the overpriced sellers in _________ Ohio thought they'd be better with an agent in _________ Ohio rather than Worthington Ohio the agent with my company used the photos I paid for without my permission.  My manager would do nothing to help me assert my right to the photos. 

R-E-S-P-E-C-T I have so much for good photographers, or mediocre photographers who were there with the camera, who want to share...  I believe in giving credit where credit is due with the written word, photos and ideas. Ideas get tougher.  That is a reason I really, really respect  Re-Blog but this post is  not about  Re-Blog.    Permission with ideas?  Not so easy.  Intellectual property... 

Images and text require permission, Creative Commons license gives permission.

Tammy wrote: "I decided when I started blogging to write my own stuff, take my own photos and videos."

If that works for you great.  I think many who use only their own content miss opportunities for collaborating with other individuals who want to share.   That's what Creative Commons license is all about, the owner sharing. 

The owner wants to be syndicated but makes decisions how... they don't say "tell Flickr thanks, grab it, link to it and run with it."

I think in part we've lost some great leaders and participation on ActiveRain ( ie. Jeff Turner) because of a mentality that does not want to collaborate with others to create content and does not want anyone else to either, "better safe than sorry." 

LOL at Mike J's "Does "...everyone..." include the GPTFS robo-commenters?"

there is no hope for robo-commenters.

Geri wrote: "I think everyone has to be responsible for themselves and check the specific terms of use before using anything that doesn't belong to them."

I agree we are each responsible for ourselves. 

I have tried to dissuade a few  new members who post an article or two a day from the Associated Press, by cutting and pasting in the whole article with a link to the original publication. That is the extent of their daily participation on ActiveRain.  I have had them argue they are just promoting the article and are giving credit.  One told me it is OK because she does it Members Only...  I noticed she stopped doing it... YAY!  I thought someone had somehow persuaded her not to.    YAY!... then saw she started it again.

Kate Both 'Fair Use' and  'Public Domain' photos confuse me greatly but are interesting. I used to watch everything Joe Ferrara (Sellsius Real Estate Blog)  did as a real estate blogger.

John Novak wrote: I'm not sure what your definition of a "John Novak comment" is

Isn't this remark that Bob made a reference to your comment?

"First, someone made the comment that AR seems to feature a blog almost every week about not plagiarizing.  The tone of the comment made me think that the person was not happy about that.  But think about it.  With so many new folks coming on board, Active Rain is choosing to be proactive in regards to plagiarism.  Sure, the guidelines clearly state not to Plagiarize, but you know as well as I do that not everybody always pays attention to the directions.  And sometimes you can miss things.  And in your excitement to get blogging, it can be easy to not think this through.  So I applaud AR for keeping this important matter in front of the community via featured blogs on the topic of plagiarism."

I believe... maybe incorrectly that Bob's 2nd post referred to three kinds of comments that he did not like on Blogging 101 - Using Outside Material Properly.

1. hateful comments

2. long comments - Referring to my comment I believe

3. John Novak comments -  Maybe you can think of another way of identifying that comment? 

I don't think it is a hateful comment or a long comment.  It is one that Bob chose to highlight.

I share your frustration.  I think the weekly "don't cut and paste content" are preaching to the choir and it is frustrating that AR does not seem to even enforce  their own guidelines. 

I think with cut and paste so rampant we do need a weekly reminder like Bob's that AR is for original content / cutting and pasting content from someone else is not original / using content with out permission (more than fair use) is against copyright laws  /  there are ways to share content and collaborate, owner of the content decides who has permission, etc.

I miss the flag. 

I got results from Harlen once.  The member came back like a bad penny. 

Sorry for the long comment.

Jon   You were the first one I noticed giving Flickr credit for the photos. 

I try to read carefully the directions from the owner of the content.  One guy who has some great OSU shots want a comment on his post where he gives permission before you use his content.  It kind of seems like Simon says...no it's a different kids game... "Mother may I________? "     but I've used one or two of his images.

There are recent changes on Flickr. That's what  "Bob's example of how to use a Creative Commons licensed photo, in Blogging 101 - Using Outside Material Properly IS wrong and getting wronger"

Claudette  I think it is funny that some members think a feature means that a post is correct, or true or what ActiveRain believes.   Even back in the day of volunteer moderators, Rich J., Laurie Manny, Mark F, Colleen K. I think some people gave what got featured was the gospel according to ActiveRain.  Not something that would increase participation, elecit comments better than other posts.

I know people who have disclosed confidential information in blogs that are rants but they  think because it got featured it's OK.

I believe with photos with a Creative Commons license permission is granted I think Bob glossed over the requirements of the owner of the content may place on use 

The thanking Flickr drives me nuts.   I can start reading Jon Z again,

Brent wrote: "I hate the fact that I buy the rights to use every photo in my blogs (unless I took them), but its the only way I know of to be completely legal."

I think using content shared by the owner with a Creative Commons license is legal.  Read Jeff Turners Creative Commons license posts...

Thanks for the "Facepalm" explanation.

I think as an industry we have a LOT of users. We do not have a lot of creators. We don't understand collaboration.   It's like "oh look pretty.  How can I use it?"

:-)