Mathew's comments - Latest Comments in Does Robert Scoble “own” his comments?

Re: Does Robert Scoble “own” his comments?

back_pain_right_side — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 23:42:47 -0000

I wanna find more info about this, anybody could?

Re: Does Robert Scoble “own” his comments?

kelly — Sun, 18 Jan 2009 18:32:00 -0000

Scoble is crazy indeed

Re: Does Robert Scoble “own” his comments?

jfsellsius — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:03:50 -0000

Easy one. The commentor owns the comment and the blog owner is given the right or license to display the comment publicly on their blog. With the right to display the comment comes the corresponding right to un-display or delete the comment.
http://tinyurl.com/6qhso7

Re: Does Robert Scoble “own” his comments?

Woadan — Sat, 31 May 2008 00:10:22 -0000

I think it really depends on what the Terms of Service, Acceptible Use Policy, or other terms on the the site say. And in that respect, if you don't like the terms, don't comment. And it follows that if you didn't familiarize yourself with the terms, then you can't complain later if they disappear or are edited.

Re: Does Robert Scoble “own” his comments?

Michael R. Bernstein — Wed, 28 May 2008 21:29:27 -0000

This is completely hypocritical of Scoble.

He's changed service providers for his blog or his blog comments a couple of times over the years and made *no* effort to bring the old comments over during each transition, effectively throwing the comments away.

Re: Does Robert Scoble “own” his comments?

mathewi — Wed, 28 May 2008 11:21:10 -0000

Fair enough, Cyndy. But I would argue that it has always been
delusional to say that ideas can be owned. They can't -- and the
screwed-up nature of the U.S. Patent Office when it comes to
conceptual patents is just one example of why.

The specific implementation of an idea can and should be ownable, and
that covers pharmaceuticals and all sorts of other inventions. And
I'm not saying copyright shouldn't exist; I just think there needs to
be a balance between the right of the content creator and the right of
everyone else to make fair use of that content in some way.

All the Web does is force us to confront those kinds of issues a lot
more directly than we have in the past.

Re: Does Robert Scoble “own” his comments?

CyndyA — Wed, 28 May 2008 10:50:27 -0000

If we eliminate the concept that ideas can be owned, where does that leave us, though? There's no copyright, no trademarks, no patents, and that brings us to a utopian ideal of communism. Problem is that people can't seem to function under that model. I keep hearing this argument that music should be free and writing should be free, and we are changing the definitions, but tell that to big pharma: they should open-source their drug research! Or Adobe should open-source all their code for Photoshop and Illustrator. It isn't really happening, but the echo chamber claims it is. If people shut off their laptops and looked at the rest of the world, they'd realize just because they say it, doesn't make it happen.

Re: Does Robert Scoble “own” his comments?

BillyWarhol — Wed, 28 May 2008 01:23:55 -0000

i'd like to think I own my comments!! Priceless as they are* Something I'm gonna have to look into on one o the other Sites* ;))

Re: Does Robert Scoble “own” his comments?

shey — Mon, 26 May 2008 23:04:22 -0000

Guess I should have finished my thought :|

I do think the blogger should be able to delete unwanted comments, and if wants to delete the post and take the comments with him, that's fine too. I wouldn't expect a blogger to give me my WordPress or Blogger comments back. That's why I like Disqus, because to an extent, it gives me more control over my comments (I know that Disqus firmly states the comments belong to the blogger).

But if my comments are on a third-party site, that's a whole other ball game.

Re: Does Robert Scoble “own” his comments?

mathewi — Mon, 26 May 2008 22:00:04 -0000

There's no question that we're living in one gigantic grey area as far
as fair use is concerned, Cyndy -- and you're quite right that the
advertising model is part of the problem. The only reason I might be
concerned about someone taking my content is that they could use it to
generate advertising revenue and thereby deprive me of the same (and
some people, like Mike Masnick at Techdirt, don't worry about it even
in that case). I still think -- or maybe hope -- that we are coming
to a time when intellectual "property" means a lot less than it used
to. Ideas aren't something that can be owned, IMO.

Re: Does Robert Scoble “own” his comments?

mathewi — Mon, 26 May 2008 21:47:03 -0000

Thanks, Sarah -- I got it working. Not sure what the problem was, but
it disappeared when I upgraded the FF comment plugin.

Re: Does Robert Scoble “own” his comments?

CyndyA — Mon, 26 May 2008 21:45:13 -0000

Thanks for the link love!

I really do think that we are at a point where a lot of this stuff will end up being defined. When Louis Gray asked if I could delete comments, I didn't answer, because it's a loaded question. I don't own the one blog people associate me with. And no, most of our authors cannot delete comments. As an editor, I have rights to delete spam, but because it is not my blog, I neither delete nor edit anyone's comments other than my own. I simply mark anything as spam that is obvious, and anything questionable I leave there.

With WordPress, if users register, then they have the right to edit their own comments. If they don't, then the only one with control is a blog admin, but there is still no established owner. I think that the entire world of creatives is at a tipping point, but we have no idea where it will tip.

There is a concept of "fair use" being touted that has nothing whatsoever to do with actual fair use. I attempted to explain fair use to someone who had lifted an entire article to publish on their blog (because it was "interesting") and was instead vilified in the comments as mean, and nasty, and told that the author of the original content was "lucky" that someone had reposted it on their blog. Lucky!

The problem with the fractured conversation is the web's current reliance on ad revenue and pageviews as a measure of success. As long as people's income is reliant on ads, this conversation will continue to take place. Scoble has a corporate sponsor. Louis Gray blogs for fun. The rest of us are at the mercy of the market, and come at it from a much different angle.

Re: Does Robert Scoble “own” his comments?

sarahintampa — Mon, 26 May 2008 21:44:56 -0000

I haven't had any problems running both, btw....

Re: Does Robert Scoble “own” his comments?

mathewi — Mon, 26 May 2008 21:38:04 -0000

I agree, Dave -- it's a pain to have to go and track comments
everywhere. That's why it's handy to have integration like
FriendFreed with Twitter and Disqus with FriendFeed and both
integrated with Wordpress, etc.

Re: Does Robert Scoble “own” his comments?

digidave — Mon, 26 May 2008 21:34:34 -0000

Generally I think scoble is spot on. But this time - WAY off. If you leave a comment on my blog post - I can delete it. Same if it's a comment on something under my FriendFeed account.

Here's the really annoying part. Am I supposed to leave a comment here, friendfeed, twitter, all of them.

I like to make time for social media - but I prefer it when new tools make it seamless, not add to my list of things to do.

Re: Does Robert Scoble “own” his comments?

mathewi — Mon, 26 May 2008 21:23:26 -0000

Figured it out -- I had an old version of the plugin, so I upgraded and fiddled with it a bit and everything works great now.

Re: Does Robert Scoble “own” his comments?

eng1ne — Mon, 26 May 2008 20:57:46 -0000

It has to be your theme, because I have both on my blog co-existing nicely.

Re: Does Robert Scoble “own” his comments?

danielha — Mon, 26 May 2008 18:58:02 -0000

Happy to help however I can then.

Re: Does Robert Scoble “own” his comments?

mathewi — Mon, 26 May 2008 18:43:04 -0000

It didn't seem to like it when I inserted the plugin code for the
FriendFeed plugin next to the Disqus comments (and by "it" I mean my
blog's theme) but I may have screwed it up somehow. I'm planning to
try again.

Re: Does Robert Scoble “own” his comments?

danielha — Mon, 26 May 2008 18:32:03 -0000

The second stage of the FF integration is on its way.

What's the problem with installing the FF plugin w/ Disqus?

Re: Does Robert Scoble “own” his comments?

mathewi — Mon, 26 May 2008 18:18:03 -0000

Thanks, Daniel. I think for many people that's one of the appealing
things about Disqus -- that it lets you effectively aggregate (if not
actually control) your comments regardless of where they are. Any
chance you're working on something along those lines with FriendFeed?
I wanted to install the FriendFeed comment plugin for my blog, but it
doesn't play nice with Disqus.

Re: Does Robert Scoble “own” his comments?

danielha — Mon, 26 May 2008 18:12:08 -0000

Actually, this is one of the reasons that Disqus exists. While a publisher can control what shows on his site, the content creator, e.g. the commenter, should have full control on the entire piece of content.

They should be able to delete or retain it, and most importantly take it with them. I may be a little late coming into this discussion, but I've been following it for a bit.

We may put out a blog post on our stance regarding this matter.

Re: Does Robert Scoble “own” his comments?

MarkDykeman — Mon, 26 May 2008 17:43:48 -0000

It does raise the question, however, of what happens when a blog owner deletes their blog. Do the commentors "own" their comments on someone else's blog? I don't think so.

Re: Does Robert Scoble “own” his comments?

chrisnixon — Mon, 26 May 2008 17:25:28 -0000

Good point.

Re: Does Robert Scoble “own” his comments?

microrahsheen — Mon, 26 May 2008 17:17:56 -0000

If someone posts a comment, I would say that they DO own that comment. They can do whatever they want with it and if someone were to try and claim that comment as their own, I believe they would be in for trouble in most cases.

On the flip side, just because you own it, doesn't mean you have control of it (unless you posted it on a Disqus-enabled blog). This means that, at any time, the owner of the site that you posted on can delete it or move it. You handed it to them.

This is the same as if you write something in any public place. The owner of that place has the write to remove your work. It may seem uncool, but it's a possibility you should expect.

This whole thing seems like a simple misunderstanding, though.

* Scoble just wants his words to be seen since he bothered to type them.

* La Gesse just wants the comments to stay on his blog and chose the best thing he knew to avoid just a problem in the future.

* FriendFeed made no provisions to try and display data that no longer has a user associated with it, which seems to be a very valid design choice given how new it is.