Ozdachs

About Ozdachs

San Francisco Internet Marketer and web designer gets you on the Internet in a cost-effective, responsible way.

4 Reasons Why I am Not Using Google+

A little over a month ago Google launched its latest competition to Facebook, Google+. Millions of users, including me, have signed up for this public trial.

But after poking around Google+ for a few days, I don’t visit it very often. Here’s why:

I am bumping against the time ceiling for social media. Frankly, Facebook is enough. Google+ has no compelling features that make me want to switch. I don’t have time in my real-world-focused life to play in a second-tier social cloud that Google+ offers.
Google+ is missing hooks for business and organizations. Even if I decided to use Google+ for my personal life, I’d have to use Facebook anyway in order to do work for my business and its clients.
Google promises that they’ll include their version of fan pages in the future, but right now my clients have no way to participate in Google+.
Google’s generic Terms of Service for all of their products includes their right to perpetually use whatever you post (words, pictures, etc.) to promote that Google’s product. Using my stuff might be okay if I am a business using AdWords. Sure! Promote my business along with AdWords. But, I don’t want my great vacation photos to appear in Google’s ads for itself. Ditto for any essays or comments I write. (My blog post on this worry.)
Google has a history of deleting accounts without warning or recourse. This man’s Google account was suspended after 7 years. Two weekends ago Google was on the top of blogs for systematically deleting “a striking number” of Google+ accounts and providing no customer support. (And, we all know that is impossible to contact Google. They may contact YOU, but it’s a one-way system.So, basically, I am not ready to trust Google with things I write or create and may want to see again.)

Google can solve my concerns over time. More features and a policy change or two will be enough. But, until then, I’ll keep blogging here for business and on my personal blog. And, I’ll spend time on Facebook who has already capitulated in the content ownership and privacy areas.

By Ozdachs|2011-08-03T12:36:29-07:00August 3rd, 2011|Tips and Resources|0 Comments

Medical transcription for the Legal Profession touted by Lady Justice

Lady Justice as Created by and for Medical Transcriptionists

“I did a Google search and found it on the Internet” is a phrase uttered by clients that starts me shuddering.

And, it is the most common response I get when I ask a client how they got an image that they have sent me to use on their website, in their newsletter, or for other marketing materials.

We’re all so used to finding what we want on the Internet and using for it our own purposes that we’ve forgotten that artists and writers own what they produce. Creative works in the United States are automatically protected by copyright laws. At least that’s what I’ve read and have been told by real attorneys.

I am not a lawyer, and don’t play one on TV. And, I also don’t want to be sued by a real lawyer. So, I make it clear to my clients that when they give me something for their site, they are telling me that they have the right to use the image, graphic, text, or whatever. And, when I recognize that it is highly unlikely that my client owns what they’ve sent me, I’ll ask them to confirm that they have the right to use the artistic work.

I think it’s fair that we use only the material we’ve either created, paid for, or have been given permission to use for some other reason. It’s the right thing to do.

You’re Not Likely to Be Sued When Your Violate a Copyright

Of course, if you find something on the Internet that you like and you use it without permission, nothing bad is likely to happen. This is common sense, and again, not a legal opinion!

It’s unlikely that the copyright owner is ever going to know what you’ve done. When you’re a small business or organization, your theft will likely go undetected in the vastness of the Internet. Ignorant owners are not going to sue.
In most cases, your theft causes no harm to the owner, so a violation isn’t going to cost you anything. Even if the owner discovers what you’ve done, it’s unlikely that they have been injured financially or emotionally. And, if they haven’t been harmed, there are not damages for them to collect from you. So, they are not going to sue.

Most likely, if your misappropriation is discovered, the copyright owner will write to you and ask you to delete their property from your web site, newsletter, or marketing piece. If you honor their request, the incident will be over.

Of course, there’s always a chance your misappropriation could cost you reputation damage and a lot of money. If your business should suddenly hit a social media bubble, the owner of something you put on your site could stumble on the theft. If your sudden popularity caused sudden riches, you’d be juicier target for a copyright suit. And, it’s still wrong to steal!

What You Can Do

If you are looking for a nifty graphic for a space on your web site or other location, there are things you can do that are legal, moral, and relatively inexpensive:

Puppies and Poppies.

Purchase images from a stock photo site. I mostly use Dreamstime which has a lot of pictures and drawings available in a format suitable for the web for $1-$3. Many of the images are licensed exclusively at Dreamstime and the site has more informal, natural looking pictures than the other stock photo sites I’ve investigated.
Create your own work. Many of the pictures I use for my clients are my own. Photos of pretty women, babies, and pets grab readers’ attention and help get your material read. Besides, I love seeing my dogs on websites and don’t charge extra when I show off Sequel or Vector! (Isn’t the picture on the right too cute?!)
Ask for permission. If you see a photo you like, write the web site owner and ask if you can use the image. Be clear that you cannot pay, if that’s the case. Most people are flattered to have their photos admired, and you stand a good chance of getting approval. Over the years I’ve allowed several non-profit organizations to copy my pictures for their use. I was flattered to be asked!
Fair use. This gets tricky, because I am still not a lawyer. But, there is concept of fair use that allows you to quote and to reprint the work of other people for specific, generally non-commercial, purposes.
Link back, give credit, and talk up the owner. This is even trickier and probably is a sub-set of “fair use” that a lawyer could explain. It’s done frequently, with good intention, and without a problem. An example of this type of copying is the image at the top of this post. That lady justice is an original drawing by the staff of San Francisco Medical and Legal Transcriptionsist, Pacific Medical Transcription (PMT). In this case I am showing the artwork in this blog, even though it lives on PMT’s web site. The web site owner, an Ozdachs client, gets a link to her site with this mention (which will help her in Google searches). Similar copying can be of book covers that link to the sales page at Amazon.com, product images which link to another online store, or reviews that link to the business being talked about.

So, you just cannot see a pretty picture and snag it for your web page. But, there are plenty of easy, inexpensive or free ways to get the graphics you want your web visitors to see.

Contact Ozdachs if you need help with your web site and marketing materials! We’d be happy to help.

By Ozdachs|2011-07-31T10:05:55-07:00July 30th, 2011|Web Design|0 Comments

When Algorithms Fail

Least you doubt that companies rely too much on technology to provide automated content on the Internet, consider this screen scrape from today’s Daily Beast:

Press releases on natural menopause relief and Rebekah Brooks and news stories on Cathie Black and a new Ambassador to Egypt appear to me to have only one thing in common: photos of women.

Really? In 2011 it’s okay to lump together any mention of women into a related category?

Obviously, the Daily Beast doesn’t care if the stories it suggests you click on are related. They are simply shoving more material at you in the hopes that you’ll see something — anything — you like and click. Perhaps their model includes getting money if you click on one of the “Paid Distribution” articles. I assumed that “paid distribution” meant that the writer published the story through PRWeb or other press release service, but maybe the payment to the Beast is more direct.

Whatever the reason, the Daily Beast sure cheapens its brand in my opinion. Employing bad algorithms to trick your readers — whether by intention or by sloppy quality control — says bad things about you. If you cut corners in your content display, how about in your reporting?

Two final snaps:

If your refresh the page, you get different related stories, but they are equally awful. My second visit:

The memory-loss woman’s photo is particularly gruesome, IMHO!
The “Related Stories” appeared at the bottom of a news article I found through Google news. The topic and headline of the master story that these women are supposedly related to: “Former Joint Chiefs Chairman Dies” on the passing of General John Shalikashvili.

By Ozdachs|2011-07-24T07:14:30-07:00July 24th, 2011|Blogging|0 Comments

Yelp Ends Free Announcement and Special Offer Postings

This afternoon I logged on a Yelp business account. The account is for my church, the First Unitarian Universalist Society of San Francisco, and most weeks I post the weekly service description as an announcement in the 140 characters Yelp has offered for free. The description shows up highlighted on the church’s Yelp page so visitors can check out what’s coming up that Sunday.

Today Yelp greeted me with a pop up saying that they were phasing out announcements and special offer notices August 11th.

Yelp said they’re stopping the free announcements because business owners had requested a better way to reach people. That smacks of an untruth, frankly. I doubt any business asked the free highlighting to stop so they can sign up and pay Yelp to offer special deals.

In fact, I am not even sure that as a consumer I need yet another deal-offering site. Groupon, Living Social, and Google are all offering deals of the day — Google’s announcement of a program for San Francisco was on the news just today. Yelp and Open Table have also sent me deal emails in the past months. A steadier stream of deals from Yelp won’t be welcome in my inbox.

And, really? Yelp is making this change for my business, the church? Wow. What kind of Yelp deal should my church offer?

A special deal on salvation? Unfortunately, hellfire isn’t a part of Unitarian Universalist theology, so we’d have to work on exactly what we’re offering. We don’t encourage visitors to contribute to the collection plate, so we cannot offer a discount there either. Would you want two sermons for the price of one, anyway?

But, I am sure Yelp’s sales staff will call us and help us figure out something we can advertize.

Ultimately, it’s disappointing that non-profit community groups are getting slammed in Yelp’s zeal to monetize its pages.

By Ozdachs|2011-07-12T17:41:46-07:00July 12th, 2011|Social Media, Yelp|1 Comment

Google+ Wants to Use What You Post Forever

Guy Burns has done a quick, non-lawyer comparison between the supposedly evil Facebook’s and the supposedly “do no evil” Google’s social media policies. It’s an extremely ugly comparison for Google.

From Guy’s public Google+ post:

Google’s rights to use your IP: perpetual and irrevocable
Facebook’s rights to use your IP: revokable (sort of)

Google+ Terms of Service, section 11.1
“You retain copyright and any other rights you already hold in Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the Services and may be revoked for certain Services as defined in the Additional Terms of those Services. 11.2 You agree that this license includes a right for Google to make such Content available to other companies, organizations or individuals with whom Google has relationships for the provision of syndicated services, and to use such Content in connection with the provision of those services.”

Facebook Terms of Service, section 2.1
“For content that is covered by intellectual property rights, like photos and videos (“IP content”), you specifically give us the following permission, subject to your privacy and application settings: you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook (“IP License”). This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account unless your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it. “

Google is dangerously overreaching, in my opinion. They are asserting that they have the right to use whatever you post — apparently regardless of what limited circle of friends you initially limited your post to. This means there is no privacy or security on ANY posts.

Not only can Google use what you write, photograph, or draw, they can adapt, modify, publicly display, etc., etc. your work for their benefit. Forever.

This is not reasonable, by any stretch of the imagination.

I strongly advise writers, artists, photographers… anyone who produces anything creative, to refrain from posting it on Google+ unless/until Google+ modifies their Intellectual Property Term of Service. (See section 11 and all of the Google+ terms online.) I won’t be posting creative pieces nor photographs on Google+ myself while the current terms are in effect.

I also strongly advise people against posting anything to any Google+ circle that they don’t want their mother, their boss, or their future spouse to see.

With no circle privacy settings honored, something you wrote to a limited group of people, may be broadcast inappropriately. When your mother is looking up dolls as gifts for the grandchildren, she can be confronted with a Google+ social networking ad that suggests she buy a “Blow Up Doll like Your Son Said He Likes.” Won’t that be a fun discussion for you and mom to have?

By Ozdachs|2011-07-11T17:25:31-07:00July 11th, 2011|Google+, Social Media|1 Comment

Previous 131415 Next