Copyright for Writers and Bloggers – Part II: Creative Commons

Providing a solution for protecting creative works on the Internet.

In the first article of this three-part series (Part I: Why Copyright is Important), I discussed the importance of copyrights to an author like me. But is an “all rights reserved” copyright appropriate for work published on the Web? I don’t think so.

In this article, I tell you a little about Creative Commons and how I use it to license my work.

CopyrightCreative Commons

What I write on my Web site is available here for free to anyone who wants to come read it. (Don’t get me wrong — if I can sell an article for real money, I do — and then link back to it from this site so my readers can still find it for free online.) But just because this material is available for free to read and link to doesn’t mean it’s not copyrighted. It is.

Many blogger and Web content creators use a Creative Commons licenses to set down the rules for using or reusing their work. The Creative Commons Web site makes this easy with its License page. As the page states:

With a Creative Commons license, you keep your copyright but allow people to copy and distribute your work provided they give you credit — and only on the conditions you specify here.

Creative Commons LicenseYou fill out a form like the one shown here by selecting options. You can click a link to display optional fields to provide more information for the licensee about the work you are licensing.

When you click Create License, the site generates some HTML code that you can copy and paste into your blog or site. The box to the right shows the example for my site. As you can see, the code includes a Creative Commons logo and the name of the license you chose as a link to a page with the full text of the license. (Follow the link in the box to see the license I use on my site.) If you go to the © page of this site, you’ll see the same logo and link.

What It All Means

Here’s what my Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License means.

You are free to share, copy, distribute and transmit the material on my Web site under the following conditions only:

  • Attribution. This means you must attribute the work to me. In other words, you must make it clear that I wrote or prepared the material you’re sharing. Not you. Not someone else. Not an unknown being. (So imagine my surprise recently when I found the full texts of one of my articles on someone else’s Web site under his byline!)
  • Noncommercial. This means you cannot use my work for commercial purposes. In case you’re wondering, if your Web site or blog or publication is sold, subscribed to for a fee, or even earns revenue from Google AdSense or some other advertising program, you cannot use my work. In other words, you can’t make money by sharing my content. Period. End of statement. (And people who haven’t understood this have had their Google AdSense accounts shut down when I complained about their violation of my copyright, which is also a violation of Google’s Terms of Service.)
  • No Derivative Works. This means you can’t take part of my work and use it as the basis for another work. You like my discussion of Creative Commons. Well, thank you. But don’t think of using it as Part 1 of a series of posts you want to do about copyright without firs talking to me. This license does not allow it.

The license goes on to state:

  • For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work. The best way to do this is with a link to this web page.
  • Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder.
  • Nothing in this license impairs or restricts the author’s moral rights.

What does this mean to you? It means that you can only reproduce or share my work if you give me credit, don’t make any money on it in any way, don’t use it as the basis of another work, and include my Creative Commons licensing terms. If you want to make other arrangements, you need to make them directly with me.

That’s My License. Yours Could Be Different.

I’m very restrictive in my license. You might not want to be.

For example, you may not mind commercial use of your work as long as you are cited as author. Or perhaps you don’t mind allowing others to build on your work — as many open source software developers allow. This can all be stated in your Creative Commons license. Just choose the options that matter to you and let the Web site generate the Creative Commons license you want to use.

Remember you can always learn more about Creative Commons licensing on their Web site. The Creative Commons Licenses page provides detailed descriptions of all licenses.

But Wait! There’s More!

While my creative commons license may seem very restrictive, there are ways you may be able to use a writer’s work — even my work — without violating any law or license. The third and last part of this series explains the basics of fair use and public domain.

Do you use a Creative Commons license on your Web site? If so, which one? And why did you make that choice? Use the Comments link or form for this post to share your thoughts.

eBooks

Some thoughts from a writer (and reader).

Earlier this month, I wrote a post that briefly touched upon my experience as an author finding my copyrighted books freely distributable on a pirate Web site. (Refer to “Copyright for Writers and Bloggers – Part I: Why Copyright is Important.”) The post generated some comments that made me think more about the electronic versions of my books that my publishers sell: eBooks.

About eBooks

An eBook is an electronic book. While some eBooks are published in electronic format only, others are published in print and then are followed up with eBook versions of the same book.

Sometimes both print and eBook versions of a book are put out by the same publisher. This is common with modern-day titles. But there are also a number of eBook publishers out there who take older titles that are still in copyright and make arrangements with the publisher or author to create and sell eBook versions. And, of course, anyone can take an out-of-copyright book, like the works of Mark Twain, Charles Dickens, Edgar Allan Poe — the list goes on and on — and publish them anyway they like: in print, electronically, or even tattooed on someone’s leg. Project Gutenberg came into existence by making out-of-copyright works available to the world and that’s what you’ll find among its thousands of titles.

eBooks are available in a wide variety of formats, from plain text to PDF to Windows Help Viewer format. They can include or exclude illustrations. They can contain hyperlinks to make it easy to move from one topic to another. They can be printable as a single document or by pages or sections.

My first involvement with eBooks was way back in the 1990s when I used a program called DocMaker on the Mac to create my monthly, freely distributable newsletter, Macintosh Tips & Tricks. I later moved to PDF format. 10 Quick Steps, one of my publishers, publishes all of its books as PDFs optimized for onscreen reading. I later published some of my own eBooks in the same format.

eBooks and Copyright

eBooks are usually sold with the same licensing used for software. One copy, one user. This is pretty basic stuff. Although I admit that I’ve never read an EULA for an eBook, I assume that if an buyer is finished with it and wants to give his/her only copy to someone else, he can. After all, that’s how books work. And, as someone who has legally transferred ownership of software by selling it (after removing the original from my computer), I’m pretty sure eBooks have a legal second hand market.

Unfortunately, due to their portable nature — pop them on a CD or compress them and send them in email or leave them on an FTP server for others to download — they are often the victim of piracy and copyright infringement. People put eBooks — whether they obtained them from legal means or not — on pirate Web sites, FTP servers, or other file sharing systems for free or paid download to anyone who wants them.

As this problem becomes more and more widespread, readers begin to think that there’s nothing wrong with downloading and sharing illegally distributed eBooks. They begin looking to illegal sources of eBooks rather than legal sources, hoping to save $10 or $15 or $20. They justify their participation in this illegal activity by saying that “knowledge should be free” or that the publisher makes enough money or that eBooks cost nothing to produce. And soon this affects the sale of both printed and electronically published books.

Who Suffers?

Are you an author concerned about illegal distribution of your eBooks? You may be interested in the new Authors Against Piracy group I’ve started to discuss the issue and share solutions. It’s a private group, so you’ll need an invitation to join. Contact me to introduce yourself. Be sure to identify your most recent published work; the group is open to published authors only.

The real victim of this is the author, who often makes less than a dollar for every book sold.

Most authors these days can’t afford to just write for a living. Some of them have regular day jobs. Others are consultants or speakers or programmers or some combination of those things.

About 95% of my net income comes from writing books and articles. My helicopter charter business, which is still in its infancy, eats up all the cash it brings in. (Helicopters are extremely costly to own and operate.) And between writing and flying, I simply don’t have time to do anything else to earn money.

So when I find my books being illegally distributed on pirate Web sites, I get angry. Can you blame me?

Is It Worth It?

In the comments for my “Copyright is Important” post, reader Nathanael Holt asked this question: “Do your digital sales warrant the increased risk posed by piracy?”

This is a really good question — one I had to go to my royalty statements to answer. And, after a quick glance at that most recent 60-page document, I’d have to say no.

For example, one of my recent titles sold more than 2,600 printed copies in the quarter ending March 31, 2007. That same title sold only 2 electronic “subscriptions.” Another title, which is older and which I have found online on pirate sites, had 9 copies of the PDF sold during the same quarter, earning me less than $15.

My conclusion from this: eBook versions of my books aren’t selling very well. And apparently the ones that get out there are going to pirate Web sites.

I’ve e-mailed my publisher’s royalty department to get lifetime figures for all of my in-print titles. I’m hoping the numbers they deliver will paint a more rosy picture. But I doubt it.

I’m an eBook Reader, Too

This is disappointing for me. You see, I’m an eBook reader.

A while back, I was looking for a book about .htaccess. That’s a normally invisible configuration file found on servers. I wanted to modify the .htaccess file for my Web site so it would do certain things for me.

This is an extremely technical topic and one I didn’t expect to find a book about. But I did: The Definitive Guide to Apache mod_rewrite by Rich Bowen. And after a bit of research, I learned that I could either buy the book from Amazon.com for $40 and wait a week to get it or buy it as an eBook in PDF format from the publisher’s Web site for $20 and download it immediately. I admit that the deciding factor was the length of the book: 160 pages. Since I like to be able to look at a computer-related book (rather than switch back and forth between a book and an application onscreen), I could print it for reference.

And that’s what I did: I downloaded the book as a DRM-protected PDF and sent it to my printer. Within an hour, I had the whole thing in a binder and was editing my .htaccess file to my heart’s content, with all kinds of notes jotted in the margins of my new reference book. (That’s another thing: I’m far more likely to mark up a printed eBook than a printed and bound traditionally-published book.)

I also read eBooks on my Treo (when I’m trapped somewhere with nothing to do).

The only reason I don’t buy and read more eBooks to read onscreen is because I think I spend enough time in front of a computer without using one to read, too.

What Does All this Mean?

Well, first I need some solid information from my publisher regarding lifetime eBook sales. Then I need to sit down with my editor (figuratively, of course — we never see each other in person) and decide whether eBook editions of my work are something we want to continue to publish. If we decide to go forward, we need to come up with a solution that will protect eBooks from piracy.

What Do You Think?

Have you ever bought an eBook? Why did you buy that version instead of a traditional print version? Did you like it? What do you think about eBooks in general: pricing, formats, licensing, etc?

Don’t keep it all to yourself! Use the Comments link or form to share your thoughts with me and other readers.

What’s In a Name?

Apparently, a lot.

I’ve been thinking it over for about six months now and have finally made a decision: I need a real name for my Web site/blog.

Maria Langer, The Official Web Site* and WebLog** is not cutting it, primarily because no one follows the asterisks to the footnotes in the footer, which say:

* Read with tongue planted firmly in cheek. (In other words, it’s a joke, folks. No, I’m not so full of myself that I think there are unofficial Maria Langer Web sites.)

** Don’t believe everything you read. (That’s my disclaimer, in case you find something inaccurate. It’s also for the folks who like to say that I’m making claims that aren’t true. Maybe I know that. Now my readers do, too.)

I think the name of my site is turning off people who don’t get it. And I don’t want them to get turned off by a name. I’d rather they get turned on or off by content.

Unfortunately, my imagination is completely tapped out and I can’t come up with any fresh, new, witty names for my site. This is what has taken me so long to make the name change decision. Obviously, if I already had a great new name, I’d just start using it.

Whatever name I do come up with must reflect the fact that the site is a mix of content, with everything from first person accounts of the things that go on in my life to illustrated how-to articles about using your computer or software. Visitors use Macs and Windows, so to include either operating system in the name just wouldn’t be right. Ditto for references to flying or Wickenburg or writing or any one specific topic I cover here. I need a name that’s more general.

I’ve got some ideas that might work, but I’d be interested in getting suggestions from the folks who have been following the site for a while. Use the Comments link or form or Contact Me with your suggestions.

I’d appreciate the help.

Copyright for Writers and Bloggers – Part I: Why Copyright is Important

Copyright basics for the Internet age.

Too often the debate over creative control tends to the extremes. At one pole is a vision of total control –€” a world in which every last use of a work is regulated and in which “€œall rights reserved”€ (and then some) is the norm. At the other end is a vision of anarchy –€” a world in which creators enjoy a wide range of freedom but are left vulnerable to exploitation. Balance, compromise, and moderation –€” once the driving forces of a copyright system that valued innovation and protection equally –€” have become endangered species.

Creative Commons is working to revive them. We use private rights to create public goods: creative works set free for certain uses. Like the free software and open-source movements, our ends are cooperative and community-minded, but our means are voluntary and libertarian. We work to offer creators a best-of-both-worlds way to protect their works while encouraging certain uses of them –€” to declare “some rights reserved.”€

This is the text you can find on the History page of the Creative Commons Web site. It explains, in part, why Creative Commons was formed and what it is trying to do.

In this three-article series, I’ll explain what copyright means to me and how I use Creative Commons on my Web site and blog to protect my work.

Copyright Is Important

CopyrightAs a professional freelance writer, I live in the first world: one where every last use of a work is regulated. Sure, I write computer books for a living. But did you know that some of my book contracts lay out the movie rights for my work? Movie rights for a computer how-to book? Are they kidding?

Sadly, they’re not. They really do take into consideration every last possible use of a work — even if that use is not very likely.

Copyright is important not only to me but to my publishers. Each book contract I sign lays down the rules of who owns the work and who has the right to market, promote, and sell it. We work together to come up with a contract that both parties are happy with, then work together to produce and sell the work so we can both make money. In general, this works pretty well. I write, my books appear in stores, and I get paid. My publisher produces my work, puts it in stores, and gets paid. We’re happy.

How Copyright Infringement Hurts Everyone

When things go wrong is when people take our work — because it really is both mine and my publisher’s together — and illegally reproduce it, either by hard-copy or digital means, and share it with others. This reduces the potential paying market for our product. How many copies of a book do you think we could sell if someone else was giving them away for free to anyone who wanted them?

And when copyright infringement like that exists and becomes widespread, books don’t sell well enough to be worthwhile to produce. Publishers don’t make enough money on certain titles, so they publisher fewer books or, worse yet, go out of business and stop publishing books altogether. Writers find it harder and harder to get book contracts, so they don’t write as much — or they stop writing.

The result: there are fewer resources out there for people who want to learn new things with the assistance of a knowledgeable author and a book they can read and refer to over and over.

All because enough people thought that our work should be distributed for free.

This hit home recently when I discovered a Web site that was distributing, free of charge, two of my books in electronic format. But it wasn’t just my books they were distributing. It was over 300 different computer how-to books — some of which were only a few months old — and tutorial DVDs and even software. The site’s slogan was “Because knowledge should be free.”

What they don’t understand is that their actions are taking away the livelihood of professional writers who work hard to write those books. Authors are people who rely on the income from books sold to survive and thrive and care for their families. Every book illegally distributed rather than sold is money from a writer’s pocket.

You’ve heard the phrase “starving writers,” haven’t you? (I never did like the idea, myself.) Think about that the next time you illegally download a pirated eBook or photocopy pages of a library book to share with your friends.

What’s Next

In the next part of this series, I’ll explain how Creative Commons helps writers and bloggers license their Internet work for use by others.

In the meantime, let’s get a discussion going. Got some thoughts about copyright protection and piracy? Use the Comments link or form for this post to share them.

Blog Mistakes? Or Choices?

A closer look at “43 Web Design Mistakes You Should Avoid” from Daily Blog Tips.

Yesterday, while trying desperately to catch up with the feeds I follow, I found “43 Web Design Mistakes You Should Avoid” on Daily Blog Tips. Daniel begins the post with this:

There are several lists of web design mistakes around the Internet. Most of them, however, are the “Most common” or “Top 10” mistakes. Every time I crossed one of those lists I would think to myself: “Come on, there must be more than 10 mistakes…”. Then I decided to write down all the web design mistakes that would come into my head; within half an hour I had over thirty of them listed. Afterwards I did some research around the web and the list grew to 43 points.

His list of “mistakes” are pretty good. They include the usual bunch of design decisions that bloggers (or their template designers) make that could affect the popularity of a blog and/or its ability to generate revenue. But in looking through the list, I realized that I’m guilty of making a bunch of these “mistakes.” And although I understand the reason Daniel thinks they’re “mistakes,” I continue to do them by choice.

My “Mistakes”

While I encourage you to read Daniel’s post and get his point of view on all 43 items he lists, I’m going to take a moment or two to pick out the rules I break and explain why.

1. The user must know what the site is about in seconds.

There’s no better way to start breaking rules than to break the very first one. The majority of people who visit my site for the first time probably don’t know what the site is about within seconds. Why? Because the site is about so many things.

This is a personal choice. I decided about two years ago that I only wanted one blog. Following the rule that a serious blogger should post at least once a day, it would be impossible for me to post every day about five specific topics if I had five separate blogs. So I’ve taken the lazy way out and have just one blog with a lot of categories.

One of the ways I’ve gotten around this (or at least tried to) is by making good use of WordPress’s category feature and even going so far as to make it very easy to subscribe to a specific category feed. So if you only come here to read about blogging, you can just follow that feed (or category).

You do realize why everyone says this is so important, right? They assume that you’re trying hard to make your blog popular, probably so you can monetize it. Although I’d be thrilled if my blog started getting 10,000 hits a day, that’s not what I’m trying to do here. My goal is to journalize my life, share insight about the things I know or find interesting, and educate the readers of my books about things not specifically covered in those books. If those purposes aren’t apparent within seconds to first-time visitors — or even within weeks to repeat visitors! — well, that’s just the way it is. My choice, my decision. But I don’t think it’s a “mistake.”

5. Do not open new browser windows.

Guilty as charged. And I know that many bloggers and Web designers say this — including the usability expert, Jakob Nielsen. That made me think long and hard before I made my decision.

The rule I follow is this:

  • If the link is to another site or page on someone else’s site, I use the _blank attribute to open that URL in a new window — or, better yet, if the browser is set up to use tabs (as mine is), in a new tab.
  • If the link is to another page on my site, I usually skip the attribute so the URL opens in the same window or tab.

Why do I do this? Well, this is the way I like to browse the Web. When I see a link on an interesting site, I want to keep reading the site and check the links later. So I open the links in new tabs and, when I’m finished with the main page, view the links in their tabs — which are already loaded and waiting for me. (Understand that I access the Internet at only 512Kbps (on a good day).) This enables me to browse far more efficiently, without missing things I want to look into — and without dealing with the erratic behavior of the Back button when forms are involved. So I set up my site to work the way I’d like other sites to work.

Think about the branches of a tree. Each time you click an external link on my site, you’re going to a new branch. But the main trunk is still there. You can close the trunk and keep exploring the branch or switch back to the trunk at any time and continue exploring from there.

Well, that’s how I think about it anyway.

15. Do not break the “Back” button.

This is related to the previous item. Evidently, spawning new windows (or tabs) breaks the back button because those new windows (or tabs) don’t have anything to go back to. But I can argue that clicking an external link on my site takes you to another site and there’s no “back” on that other site.

It’s just the way I look at it, I guess.

24. Do not blend advertising inside the content.

I do break this one occasionally, but not very often. It’s usually with links to books or other products on Amazon.com (is that an ad?) or the occasional company-specific ad. I think it’s okay to do this once in a while, but the ad should definitely be related to the post content and there should not be an ad in the middle of every single post on the site.

There are a number of Web sites I stopped following because there were just too many ads — especially annoying, blinking or flashing ones.

33. Make clicked links change color.

Well, the links do change color here, but the change is not very noticeable. I think I need to work on that a bit. The reason I’m not in a big hurry to fix this is that pages change often here so what was at a link yesterday might not be the same content at that link today.

39. Include functional links on your footer.

I put this stuff in my header. I don’t see any reason not to include it in the footer as well — except that it’s pretty obvious in the header.

40. Avoid long pages.

Hey, I have a lot to say!

WordPress can be configured to display a certain number of posts on the Home page and any “archive” pages. An archive page is a category page, a date page, an author page — any page that groups one or more entries by a certain variable. The trouble is, the number of posts that appears on the Home page must be the same number that appears on the archive pages. What should that number be? I settled on 8 after trying all kinds of combinations.

My posts vary greatly in length. Some are very short — only a few sentences or paragraphs. Others are very long — 1500 words or more, with photos. I want the content area of each page to be longer than the sidebar area. But I don’t want the pages to be very long. That’s how I settled on 8.

While I understand the reason for keeping pages short, I also want to avoid the tricks required to pull off this design rule:

  • Write shorter posts. Changing the length of your post to meet a design need is an instance of the tail wagging the dog. Writers, in general, don’t like to do this. It tends to indicate that layout is more important than content. Since writers are providing content, it’s rather insulting to insinuate that what they have to say is less important than the way it appears in a Web browser window (or on a printed page).
  • Use the < --more--> tag. This is a WordPress feature that enables you to break a post into two or more pages. It has its pros and cons, which I plan to discuss in a future post. (The sad truth is, I woke up this morning thinking of the < --more-->. A more normal person would wake up thinking about breakfast or what they were going to do today.) In general, I don’t use it because I think it’s an inconvenience to readers. Why should I give my readers extra work just to keep my pages short?

My Score

So I’ve made 7 out of Daniel’s 43 listed “mistakes.” You should now understand why. Whether you agree or not is something you need to decide.

Have any thoughts about this? Don’t keep them to yourself. Use the Comments link or form to share them with other readers.