Content, Creativity, and Ownership, Where is the Line ?
I am a freak. I state that up front just to dispel any thoughts that I have preconceived ideas about the topics I shall now explore. I have published a whopping 75 articles on another venue, 50 were likely bad photos with some narrative, and a few were inspired prose, perhaps with some images.
I do not wish to disrespect either venue by co-publishing content, It is in fact my content to distribute as I see fit, and what I don't see fit, Google can take care of the rest with the cache retrieve.
I saw fit to inquire on the subject with the management, and the only issue was ownership of the content. As it was almost all completely original, not really an issue.
That does not assuage my possible guilt if material was "shared". As I am not generating any income, I do not give a damn. I participate in these communities for pure entertainment with the hope of some positive feedback, If I get some, great, if not, only good.
I invite all members to publish whatever they wish, that they own, and build the community and content.
I could add a a cliche or two, just do what seems right to you.
84.
Tags
Who is online
519 visitors
84 ,
From what I understand , when you publish something on the vine , they own the copyright . That is not the case here . If you publish something here and are concerned about ownership just put a copyright notice on it .
And that may be your solution to the first sentence . If you want to co-publish content , I suggest you publish here 1st with a copyright notice . Then when you publish on the vine indicate that the material was copyrighted elsewhere . Then all rights can be reserved to you . Is that what you were getting at ?
Not at all, as I understood the EULA from NV, all original content was copyrighted to the publisher.
Now that did not stop them from providing links to other sites in the family, the Today page was shocking when I went there. I was trying to remain discreet.
My concern was being polite and not to cross contaminate between sites. My writings come from moments of inspiration, and are not easily reproduced or reworked. I do not control the muse.
I don't really care one way or the other, the pics are mine for sure, at least until Thursday, and the content is mine, but it was not produced with the intent to make a profit.
Thanks for the feedback.
84
Actually, if I remember my business law, it only belongs to the publisher, if you have been compensated for it. There was a time, when the vine did compensate but not anymore. Therefore, I think they could have a run for their money, so to speak, if they complained... not that they would. It wouldn't be worth their money for litigation.
I hear ya on this subject.
I have always written because I felt compelled to. Something was brewing in my head and it had to come out one way or another. It's how I found myself on the other venue. Ideas that I wanted to share.
Now hopefully, people enjoyed my work and if they didn't I found out. But everything I wrote, meant something to me. Each one was like a child to me; different and special.
I think for those of us who like to write, that is why we come to these kinds of sites. It's also why when Mac and I were brainstorming NT, that we didn't want ownership of anyone's work. It was enough that they benefited the site, by bring an audience.
So I guess that is where I stand. I feel the content is an act of creativity, to be shared but owned by the writer.
BTW 84, you should tell me when you are publishing a new orginal piece so that I can put it up on the Columnist Board.