copywrite

[NGazzara]

Greetings All,

Does anyone know how I can copywrite my pages. Is there a service through Blue Voda or do I have to go through the conventional channels.

Thanks for any assistance.

Nancy

[Vasili]

Re: copywrite

Having been advised to keep things "sweet and simpler" I can offer you a couple of posts that will answer most of your thirst for righteous info, each regarding the differences between Copyright, Trademark/Servicemark, and Patent:

1. http://www.vodahost.com/vodatalk/general-support-issues/11972-domain-name-copyright-question.html?highlight=copyright#post71555

2. http://www.vodahost.com/vodatalk/bluevoda-general-issues/11625-copyright.html?highlight=copyright#post68251

[NGazzara]

copywrite

Thank you Vasili, much appreciated.

[Bethers]

Re: copywrite

I suggest you add a "copyright 2006" to the bottom of every page of your website. You can also put that your website and materials are copyrighted into your meta.

[Vasili]

Re: copywrite

I don't agree about adding declaratory information into MetaTags. Completely unecessary, and has no benefit whatsoever. It may even prove to be "non-conforming."

Additionally, if "Policy" has been composed with care as Content of your site, it is not required to add the year of statement (i.e. "2006"), and this fact is allowing the emergence of the trend of eliminating it altogether. (Refer to US Patent & Trademark Office)

Should any issue arise, the assumption of pertinent proof being available is now common and becoming "ipso facto."

[Bethers]

Re: copywrite

I disagree. Yes, anything written, all pictures, automatically are copyrighted - however the standard is still to put that info down - here is a good article on this:

http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html

and it doesn't hurt to have the year/years - although, again, it's not really necessary.

I, also, don't see a need for it in the meta - however it will NOT hurt anyone to put it there and it is NOT going to make a website out of compliance. The spiders won't spend time on it - and if someone should happen to "steal" from you - the info would be right there where they could have easily found it that you are protecting your rights.

I am a believer in making sure that people know that I take my rights seriously - using copyright and trademark symbols are one way to do that.

[Vasili]

Re: copywrite

1. I disagree. Yes, anything written, all pictures, automatically are copyrighted - however the standard is still to put that info downand it doesn't hurt to have the year/years - although, again, it's not really necessary.

2. I, also, don't see a need for it in the meta - however it will NOT hurt anyone to put it there and it is NOT going to make a website out of compliance. The spiders won't spend time on it - and if someone should happen to "steal" from you - the info would be right there where they could have easily found it that you are protecting your rights.

3. I am a believer in making sure that people know that I take my rights seriously - using copyright and trademark symbols are one way to do that.

This is getting quite awkward, Bethers.....

1. What do you disagree with, exactly? My post said I did not agree with the declaratory info in the Meta, which you aquiessced in # 2 below???
I will set you straight on one thing, however: Everything is NOT "automatically copyrighted" as you state. That would be absurd, especially if it was plagerized, wouldn't it? That is why above I provide simple means to establish "rights" and recourse, should they be called for.
And, in your closing sentence, you admit that including the "copyright year" is not required....my other mention in disagreeing with your post.
So what's there left to disagree with?
I don't get it - nor do I particularly regard an "article" with more genuine authority than what is available from the Governement. Who would? Why bother?

2. Already mentioned above...your admission that your original post might not be as presented.

3. The only "use of symbols" permitted by the general public is the Copyright, and then only if stipulations with reference are provided! ......You must officially register with the US Patent and Trademark Office all Register Trademarks and Servicemarks, or suffer punitive actions for mis-use of them!

There is a lot of good intention yet ill-construed information surrounding clearly defined precepts like Copyright, Trademark, Servicemark, and the processes one my comply with when including them in a cognizantly designed website. Thus, the confusion persists.
A lot of VodaHost clients read these threads, and use many of the posts as foundations for their businesses without persuing the depth of the matter completely, so I believe it is extremely important to be as accurate and as objective as possible when trying to present a potentially complicated matter with simplicity and assured comprehension.

Don't you agree?

Having been through the process many times and paid for the privilege of protecting my "property" I speak from personal experience with the hope of presenting a usable, reliable, and implementable "Advisory" as a meaningful contribution to VodaTalk, without resorting to assumption or supposition.

[Bethers]

Re: copywrite

I was not trying to start an argument - I just disagreed about not needing to use or say that you are copyrighting.

There IS a lot of confusion regarding copyright law and always has been - which is why it is read differently by different people - and there are always lawsuits going on.

You disagreed with my stating that the copyright "could" be put in the meta and on the bottom on the page - and my premise is simply that putting it in both places gives people more of an opportunity to show that they are being proactive regarding what is theirs.

Actually, I think the government website, in their own words pretty much agree with me about nearly everything is copyrighted:
"Copyright protection subsists from the time the work is created in fixed form. The copyright in the work of authorship immediately becomes the property of the author who created the work. Only the author or those deriving their rights through the author can rightfully claim copyright."

Now, this does not mean that if someone takes someone else's work, it is also copyrighted. Of course, that is absurd. But that has been the basis of lawsuits for years and years - people trying to prove that the other person was aware of the original, etc etc.

We agree on most of this - so I probably started my last post somewhat incorrectly by stating "I disagree" - having had to deal with a lot of major corporate law - I'm a strong believer in dotting i's and crossing t's - and I'd rather have the copyright and years in the footer of all my pages - than not have it. It's simply a precaution - that, as you say, may not be necessary, but does not hurt and just might help me someday if I find myself having to defend against a copyright infraction.

Same as I have my customers mark on the check-out page of my websites they they have read and understand my returns policy. On the rare occasion when someone disputes a credit card charge, I'm a step ahead of the game and have a better chance with the credit card companies.

I like to be proactive.

By the way, there has already been a question of copyright on websites that use designers or seo firms - as to who actually owns what is on the website - is it the owner of the website or the designer? In many cases it's the designer and/or seo company.

[Vasili]

Re: copywrite

Good to clear things up!

(BTW My only comment on footers was the date....stating the assertion that to defend your right is crucial to any claims of resonable recourse, and I too, always place it wherever possible. As a matter of fact, I even use Alien's RC-Deny script, believing it deters most possible occasions!)

I have run across quite a few of these so-called "web masters" who in truth were feeble in practice, but the majority of them seemed to have cloned a form contract with the clause that, in effect, required you to "rent" or "lease" back your website after completion of any "artistic" contribution, regardless of whether any image, Content, or intellectual property was clearly yours, and within the "scope of your work." I was always amazed at their frustration when I indicated I would never agree to any such thing, as they acted like I caught them with their pants down!! LOL
This practice is still widespread, and as long as they are being paid a "fee for service" it is illegal, even if that service is composing or creative: i.e. when I write website Content for a client, I relinquish rights the moment I take compensation or deliver the project. The same goes for an office worker writing content (or even taking pictures) for the company website, either original , updating, or "ghosting" (outline, finsihing, etc.) since it was done on Company time and within the "scope" of employemnt. (There was a celebrated example used that of a lawyer being paid a fee for specific services to be rendered, even with confidential - read intellectual property here- information that might influence his actions either on behalf of the original client or to the benefit of potential others: knowing details of a crime, he went out and pre-solicited a client under the guise of "protecting his rights, only to be later accused of unfairly and/or under-representing his original client. Since the original client had documents detailing efforts and understandings, not only was the lawyer forced to recuse himself from the second client's case, but the original defendant on a new trial.) You have to be careful in spelling out what is "creative" and what is "technical" to avoid any confusion, and if someone is helping to publish a site, any creative additions may indeed construe indefinite rights.....often depending on the elmental value or the degree of "contribution", all of which needs to be addressed in writing (even if it means re-writing or making changes to a document submitted to you - and don't fear big names: they aquiessce all the time as well).

THIS awareness came to me after an experince having depended too much on an individual way back in 1999 when I began my online experience. I specifically ordered domains, graphically designed an entire website (and fought tooth and nail for a year to get him to do exactly what I wanted without his constant interpretation), and wrote Content myself...all of which was incredibly gruelling for me being new to a certain industry. It was only when I outgrew his capabilities and decided to move hosts and update "my sites" that I ran into the obstacle of all my domains and sites being held hostagein his personal account, and my exhasperation trying to prove true legal ownership of them (back then, it was still possible to deal personally with the hosting company's principals, who were sympathetic as well as helpful).
I do know this type of "web-slamming" has grown to be one of ICANN's greatest persistent problems (in addition to domain speculation), and now that the online population has grown exponentially, it is impossible to keep good numbers on how many individuals are victimized being ignorant of the processes of "webbing" that could offer them the protection needed.

Thank God I was intelligent enough to write my own contract for the entire "design" and insisted on paying by invoice/company check to document both the "lock-in" price I negotiated, but also provennance.

It seems to me that every "webmaster" I've encountered since then also engages in these practices, whether to "lock in customers" (can't keep them any other way?) or to possibly even wrench out from underneath them potential money-making domains and sit, I don't know. I do know, however, that it is these experiences that make me so personally fortunate and a regular poster about my gratitude for VodaHost providing me with the opportunity, the tools, and the technologies for me to both manage and define my online future myself!

I like the idea of having customers "accept" terms on carts, and it seems to be a continuation of proprietors resorting to proactive defense in so many ways. Having to comply with the Partiot Act, Visa/MC SecurePay, verified gateways and encrypted platforms, and exhorbitant discounts for transactions made online all makes for less than rosy potential for honest profitability. Another reason I am always blowing the "plan" horn, especially when it comes to business!!! So many people are entering online commerce without any business acumen whatsoever that it alarms me, thinking that they will become a new segment of fraud victims and the result will be even more restrictive measures on all of us (just the excuse government needs to get their hands involved?).

Thanks for your continued contributions.....you and the others help to provide me with some sense of continuity!
LOL

[Bethers]

Re: copywrite

Vasili,
I sometimes shoot off the hip in these forums - as my time is precious. That means I can come off different from how I mean - sometimes people think I'm "hard" on them in reviews - when I never mean it that way at all - but I want them to do the best they can do.

Unfortunately, with copyright and many other things online - what is best and what happens again don't always match. You and I agree with the basics - were talking semantics and different case scenarios.

And, yep, having the year isn't important -

As to my adding the requirement to accept my returns statement - that's the one error page that pops up the most on my website - when people skip checking that box - but they go back and check it - and it hasn't seemed to lose me customers - but has made the cc companies happy.

I come from the hotel industry where chargebacks are a nightmare - and I had an excellent record there of "winning" them (which was/is not the standard in that business) - want to keep my same track record now - and, as my stores grow, I know there will be some chargebacks.

I totally agree with you about web designers, etc - unfortunately, in many cases, people sign the contracts that allow the designers to pretty much own their site - including the domain name, etc.

I also don't like the resellers of domains for the same reasons you stated above. That's how most web designers work - using resellers accounts and keeping the site completely under their control. Like you, I think that method stinks - and I think it's sad that it's the only way they feel they can keep the business - people cannot easily leave their services - they'd need to get a new designer to do the same thing all over again.

<Shaking hands with Vasili>
We are on the same page :)

[Bethers]

Re: copywrite

Here's a good article on Copyrights, Patents and Trademarks.

An Introduction to Copyrights, Patents and Trademarks

[Dori]

Re: copywrite

Glad to see you are keeping it 'sweet and simple' Vasili!
You crack me up... LMAO

[Vasili]

Re: copywrite

Learn or Burn, kiddo!

There is far too much ignorance in the world to let go unchallenged, and far too many individuals that need to be accountable more often for more of themselves.

It's always nice to know who you can rely on, and why.