It’s one of those buzzwords soon to be condemned to hell: pro blogging. So who are these pro bloggers and what can we learn from them? Hopefully we can make a million dollars by doing very little work. In fact, quite the opposite is true- as with most things in life. As DPY pointed out in our “Attempting the William Hung Path to Celebrity” post- it’s just good old-fashioned, honest, hard work that will enable you to reach those dizzy heights.

Nevertheless, there are those out there making a living from blogging as a “real job” and kudos to them. Why shouldn’t they? They write better and more engaging articles than half the “real” offline journalists. And so..if I could impart a message to these bona fide “pro bloggers“- don’t be shy, go for it!

Case in point with perhaps the most successful “pro blogging” site out there: problogging.net run by Darren Rowse. I’ve read a lot of his posts and they’re excellent- & he’s obviously very active with promoting “pro blogging“, but when it comes to telling us about his earnings- which is surely one of the chief goals of pro blogging, Darren becomes amazingly reticent. While this is quite endearing, it’s also something to get over and shout from the hilltops. Usually he escapes the question by providing another link, hoping that the effort of further navigation will deter us! So that even with the post “How Much Do I Earn From Blogging” one doesn’t actually get a straight answer, but rather a series of self-deprecating excuses (are you sure you’re not English?)

This is a question that I get asked more than any other. I was brought up not to really talk about money and what you earn so I’m always hesitant to do so – but due to the large interest in the subject I’ve from time to time given some indication (it can be vague) of what kind of money blogging brings me. Remember I have 20 blogs and these figures are not just for this blog (in fact this blog makes very little).

Well done, mate. It’s nothing to be sniffed at. And if you are in college or just graduating, so say from age 18-25, it’s not bad at all. Or if it’s just a side-income. But if you’re getting a bit longer in the tooth and its your fulltime job, then $100,000 really isn’t going to cut it. Health care, diapers, kids’ education, mortgage payments, the wife’s Gucci handbags- you name it- $100k doesn’t go far in this day and age.

And for such obviously intelligent people as Darren Rowse is- it’s nothing in comparison as to what he would earn in a white collar job- whether it be in the stockmarket or any corporate set-up. The achievement here is in that blogosphere remains so “amateur” in nature- that to make six figure earnings per annum is remarkable in relation to the earnings of other bloggers. But in itself, it’s really no big deal at all.

So what to do? If you’re really thinking of going “pro” with blogging- I’d take in some of the conventional marketing wisdom passed down by the likes of Matt Gagnon (mazu.com) and the late Corey Rudl (marketingtips.com). There is nothing these guys like doing more than selling their own success stories to make more money. I think Corey was making about $4 million per year at the time he died so tragically in that car accident. Now there’s a tidy sum…

Of course, there are some total scoundrels out there calling themselves “pro bloggers” just because they’re egomaniacs who believe their own propaganda. Well, it’s not like they’re giving out accredited diplomas for the status of “pro blogger“. Now there’s an idea, Darren. How about starting a membership club for pro bloggers...?

[tags]pro blogging,pro bloggers,darren rowse,blogging for money, blogging for profit,problogging.net,corey rudl, matt gagnon[/tags]

We’ve been getting a series of complaint emails from Gawker over our Gaming Blog, in terms of the domain name “Kotaku” and, thus far, no agreement or settlement has been reached. When you look into it, there is some interesting case history in terms of trademarks vs. domain names. To see an excellent legal summary, visit the Harvard Law website.

One good case example, some time ago, was between eToy.com vs. eToys.com as it is, like many of these cases, a David and Goliath story. And, perhaps surprisingly, in most instances- the courts have favored David. If one searches through the Domain Name Handbook Dispute Diaries – most courts have found that the registering of a domain is simply the taking of an opportunity, unless the registrant is falsely posing as the company with a specifically registered trademark. In other words, based on case history, it’s an extremely cumbersome case to prove and the bar is set high.

And this is in the United States, where anti-cybersquatting laws have been passed by Congress and work in conjunction with ICANN’s UDRP. But when one starts getting into the foreign laws and less established TLDs- it becomes a maze almost impossible to unravel.

Let us deal with ICANN’s Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policies-:

The policy provides that all domain name registrants must submit to mandatory administrative proceedings if:

1. the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark in which the complainant has rights; and

2. the domain name holder has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name; and

3. the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.

There are four factors in the policy listed as evidence of bad faith registration and use:

1. circumstances indicating that the primary purpose is to sell or transfer the name to the trademark owner or competitor for consideration in excess of direct costs related to the domain name; or

2. history of registration in order to prevent the IP owner from reflecting their mark in a domain name; or

3. registration primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor; or

4. intentional attempts to attract users to your site for commercial gain, by creating a likelihood of confusion as to source or endorsement.

If any of these apply, then the registration is in bad faith. However, if the domain name holder has a legitimate interest, then a trademark holder will not win under the UDRP. The policy lists 3 factors as evidence of legitimate interests:

1. use or demonstrable preparations to use the name in a bona fide offering of goods or services before notification of dispute; or

2. if the entity or person was commonly known by the name even if it has no trademark rights; or

3. legitimate, noncommercial or fair use of domain name without intent to misleadingly divert consumers or tarnish the mark at issue.

But here is the problem as pointed out by Harvard Law....

There is some question regarding the enforceability of the registrar agreements both inside and outside the United States. These agreements could be considered contracts of adhesion since registrants have no other options for registering a name in a gTLD.

In our case, the name “Kotaku” is actually in honor of a 17th/18th Century Japanese artist and we do have declared interests outside of the US. For example, see our Japan Blog and major Japanese website. Does a US trademark supercede a Japanese trademark or patent?

Furthermore, the UDRP requires not only that the domain name was registered in bad faith, but that it is being used in bad faith as well. Nowhere in our Gaming Blog do we claim to be Kotaku.com or anything to do with the “brand” developed under that trademark, by Gawker.

The fact is that, as “Goliath“, Gawker had ample opportunity to register the .net version of Kotaku.com. That they chose not to is their own oversight. It should not be incumbent on us, “David”, to lie down and be trampled on- just to protect the interests of those who have been remiss in their online business strategies. Are they seriously saying that by registering a trademark in the US, this gives them an immediate right to all ICANN domain names for that name? What a bargain that would make all trademark registrations!

By caving into demands that are beyond reasonable, one would open the door for corporations to be able to impose trademarks on a huge amount of words/phrases that might be otherwise considered as “generic” or part of the “public domain”. Should Johnsons have a trademark right over all ICANN domains for “Baby Shampoo“? The mind boggles…

This is not in any of our interests. Don’t the Goliaths have enough advantages already in the online marketplace?

And so, while we may lose this particular battle..it will not be without a fight.

[tags]gawker,kotaku,domain name disputes,icann,udrp,cybersquatting,etoys,harvard,gaming,japan[/tags]

The Bloggy Network picked up an interesting blog last weekend at sitepoint. Quoting from the auction:

Buzzword Hell was a blog I started whose mission was to condemn all the buzzwords that floated around our industry. It’s a blog with a very unique system in that it “condemns” buzzwords to the circles of hell from Dante’s Inferno. Each buzzword is condemned based on the number of comments it has gotten.

It certainly is a very clever and original idea! And also some interesting backlinks; for instance from wikipedia’s page on buzzwords and an interview by Ben Bleikamp on his old College Start-Up blog.

Current “buzzwords condemned to hell” include-:

* Ajax

• Bandwidth
  
• Beta
  
• Blogosphere
  
• Folksonomy
  
• GYM Free
  
• Information Superhighway
  
• Live Search
  
• Meme
  
• Pagerank
  
• Paradigm Shift
  
• Progressive Enhancement
  
• Realign
  
• SEO
  
• Social Networking
  
• Spear Phishing
  
• Synergy
  
• Thought Leader
  
• Web 2.0
  
  

  BuzzwordHell.com is the creation of Bryan Veloso, known by his followers in blogosphere as “rock star”. Bryan is a member of the 9 rules network through his personal website: AvalonStar.com. He has worked for Facebook and Automattic, while achieving genuine “celebrity blogger” status through such landmark posts as his “Saying Hello to Aries” and the launch of his own WordPress theme: “Chaotic Soul“.

  
  

  Bryan has some good tips in his 9 rules interview for any wannabe “celebrity bloggers” out there. Amongst them, some modest advice-:

  
  

  I’m proud to say that I feel I have one of the most dedicated reader bases out there. For what reason? Why do they keep coming back? I really couldn’t tell you. I could assume, but then I could be making an ass of myself. Hmm… I try to talk to people like they’re right next to me, I try to be conversational. I don’t think there is any other way blogging should be. Blogging is a conversation between multiple parties. I’m a huge believer in transparency, which means that I never hide anything from my readers.

  
  

  [tags]bryan veloso,buzzwords,star bloggers, rock star,live search, web 2.0,9 rules,facebook,sitepoint,wikipedia[/tags]
  

As promised, I’m following up my previous post on the DMCA- trying to make sense out of the madness, as I perceive it. So I asked Jonathan Bailey of Plagiarism Today a question regarding my main concern-:

Are 3rd parties like this allowed to write to a host and request such drastic action without going through some sort of formal procedures? Otherwise anyone can just do this as an act of sabotage?

Here is his answer to this-:

“The honest answer to your question is yes, no and maybe.

The DMCA itself only allows two groups of people to file a notice. The copyright holder or a “designated agent” to act on their behalf. That agent is usually an attorney that has a legally signed document declaring them to be an agent on file.

So yes, it is possible for a third party to file a notice- but only with a valid contract to do so. Being a designated copyright agent is a fairly big deal and not something you can assume you have.

The exception to the rule is if your site happens to be in the EU. The EU has a similar notice and takedown provision to the U.S. but there is no specific requirement as to who can file the notice. Theoretically at least, anyone, even a perfect stranger, can file the

notice.

That, potentially, makes situations like this dangerous in the EU. You and I can reach a pact to allow reuse of some of my work, someone else notice the infringement and then file a complaint with your host, getting the work removed. This hurts both of us.

The only way I know to guard against that is add a tag line saying that it is “used with permission from” and then give the site name.

Still, even that is no guarantee.

This is something that the EU is going to have to work out.”

For those of you with sites in the EU that this may concern, I followed up with another question to Jonathan-:

When you say “in the EU”- would that mean where the site is hosted or the location of the domain registrant? And doesn’t this get confused with hosting resellers being located outside the US, while the main server is in the United States?

To which he responded-:

“EU deals with the host. The domain registrant has nothing to do with it.

Ponder a scenario here. If a Russian plagiarizes an Australian author but uses a U.S. Web host, the Australian man would use a DMCA notice to get the work removed. Similarly, if the Russian chose a host located in the EU, the Australian would go through those procedures.

It’s a matter of where the data is stored physical and which country “owns” the server. It is interesting when you get to matters of collocation, which can put a single site across many different countries, but in those cases you focus on the main one.

ThePirateBay has used that rub to keep their site alive, despite multiple copyright threats.”

This answer from Jonathan far from put my mind at rest!!

The laws in the US need reviewing now and the EU has to attend to their chaotic interpretations even more urgently.

Watch this space.

I tried to resist writing this. Really, I did. But the ramifications are just too great. Most of you will know the amount of time and effort that goes into building and sustaining a website- especially a blog, and the thought that it can all be taken away by some random absurdity is too much to bear. Welcome to DMCA Madness.

This all started when we purchased JOAB from David Krug last July. There was a running dispute between him and Dan Zarrella about the site’s ownership- and, more relevant to us, the content on the blog we had just purchased. The upshot was that Dan Zarrella threatened us with a DMCA if we didn’t remove all content written by him and we did a post “What’s the deal with a DMCA?” exploring the consequences as far such a threat was concerned.

One upside to that episode was gaining valuable insights from an expert in this area- Jonathan Bailey from Plagiarism Today. Apart from leaving a lot of useful comments, emailing me thorough explanations (& advising that we did indeed take need to take down Dan Zarrella’s content), he also authorized us to use his content on some new anti-plagiarism software coming onto the market called Blogwerx. These included posts like “The Need For Sentinel” and were posted under Jonathan’s own username “copyspy”, which was a link back to Plagiarism Today.

All well and good. Water under the bridge. And then what? Unbelievably, out of the blue- we get an email from Blogwerx:

There are several blog posts that seem to have the exact same content as other locations. This content has been scraped and I would ask that you take it down in accordance with the DMCA.

Okay…fair enough…you think that they might have been pleased with the plug, but they probably don’t know that we had Jonathan Bailey’s permission- so we’ll just write back to them and let them know. No harm done.

But here is where the madness sets in. We get another email from Blogwerx, minutes later (allowing no time for the “personal request” or “warning” to be responded to)- but this time it’s to our email at imandhost.com -:

All of the content located on www.jackofallblogs.com has been scraped from other locations. This is an infringement of US copyright law and the DMCA. I would ask that this site be removed from hosting or the entire account for this user be removed. If you need further information please feel free to contact me.

Notice the change in language. From “several posts”, we now have “all the content”. And “locations” in the plural…

So let’s just recap. Having received permission from an author to publish his content reviewing a particular product, we receive a request from the developer of this product to take the content down as it is “scraped”. And allowing zero time for a response to clear the matter up, this third party- who is not the owner of the content and has no rights or claim to it, is writing to our server- not only asking that this blog be taken down, but for our whole user account (what- 200 sites?) be removed?

Seriously dangerous stuff as a precedent. As it turned out, the matter was resolved quickly and amicably. Jonathan Bailey confirmed with the people at Blogwerx that he had given his permission for us to publish his content. He also confirmed that he had no knowledge of their threat and that he had not instructed them to act on his behalf in such matters. And kudos to Blogwerx, they came back with a sincere and genuine apology. So no hard feelings there.

Still, it completely freaked me out that, as a precedent, a third party- who does not own or have any rights to the content in question, does not act for or have the permission of the content’s owner- can issue a DMCA threat to a server (which must, by law, be acted upon) and that this be within the boundaries of the current laws governing the internet. Where the hell is the common sense there?

So I’m going to be revisiting this matter in the coming days to clarify exactly where one stands with this DMCA madness- as I’m sure that you, like me, would like to protect yourselves not just from plagiarism, but also baseless claims against your website which can, regardless of the merits, cause you a great deal of trouble.

These days, I see these “celebrity blogs” going up left, right and center. We at Bloggy Network are guilty of it too- with our own Hollywood Blog. The question is why the hell do we bother? It is at its best a complete and utter waste of time, but a good laugh. At its worst, it’s just sad pandering to the fickle shallowness of a bored readership.

Good revenue, good stats. I get it. But I just pray that there is some equanimity and it doesn’t last. It certainly doesn’t deserve to. Seems that the “snarks” are trying to jump on the celebrity blog bandwagon as well. The problem is- they’re not very good at it. When posting “where is the real snark?“- I realized that there is an element of femininity to snark, but it doesn’t really translate from its core nastiness into genuinely funny, bitchy humor in this area. Again, one finds that the best celebrity blogs are written by gays, like The Superficial- but their bitchiness is in their ability to be witty and cruel, rather than just aimlessly stirring pots.

Where are the philosophers, the poets, the Nobel Peace winners, the scientists- the people that actually have something to say? They may not be “beautiful”- but personally, I’d be more interested in seeing them have prime time interviews than these bit-part idiots. Being snide apart- it’s all fine as fun and games, put in the correct perspective. That is- that beauty really is only “skin deep”. And that these people are supposedly “artists” in a world of “make-believe”. I love to watch an actor and actress in any given role and of course “looks” matter, but it is the character that they play, as if they are a court jester to us- the court, that matters- not what lies behind the mask. Just like when one looks at a painting, first one admires the work of art, rarely even knowing the hand that made it. Anybody who is “obsessed” with “fame seekers” is, quite frankly, very ill or very sad. Some of the blogs that we have reviewed at Bloggy Award in this area- really do worry me. For example, “Jake Watch” literally stalks the every movement of Jake Gyllenhaal.

Enough said. I probably sound like an old pompous fuddy duddy.

There was a time when I was young and beautiful myself! To cut a long story short, I had an amazing connection called Roger Corman, a mover and shaker in Hollywood. So for a while I got “on the circuit” and met quite a lot of the “stars” up close and personal. They were never what one expected. In fact, on the whole, a dreadful disappointment in their “normality”. I’m not going to reel off a whole load of name drops and it seems a terribly long time ago anyway- but I would say that the famous comedians I met were deadly dull!

As far as their rights to privacy are concerned, I find it double standards. They are biting the hand that feeds them. One might not include celebrity blogs in the “paparazzi paranoia”- but they use and discard them in a similiar fashion through their duplicitous actions and desperation for attention, good or bad.

And that brings me full circle to the original point I was trying to make. These blogs about celebrities are trying to become “famous” themselves as uncensored commentators. If you’re going to try that- you’d better be buying your own BS before anyone else does. Otherwise it’s just more regurgitated c..p about the same stuff everyone already knows- that is… for anyone who is gripped by this nonsense.

Quimby’s tiger was released from his soul over Paid Text Links Ads and Google’s policy on them. Or my post about it…whatever. Ah well…paid or unpaid links, Matt Cutts slobbering and Google worshipping aside, surely we can find something more approriate to release our soul’s energy over?

I dunno…where shall we start? Global Warming...Starvation in Africa...War in the Middle East. You name it. There’s a whole host of issues, that we as responsible, reasonable and educated people (hopefully) need to discuss and search our souls over. Or not. Maybe you are on an internal journey, seeking enlightenment. But splitting hairs over Search Engine policies towards paid text links is a tangent of an abstract issue, at best, and while it’s definitely worth discussing, it’s about as unspiritual as you can get. It doesn’t matter what, if any, your God (or faith) of choice is, but none of them would encourage you to link your soul (pun intended!) to such a trivial matter.

Of course, my tongue is firmly in cheek here! It is great that those who write and contribute on JOAB can openly disagree. What a boring world it would be if we all did agree. And Quimby made some good points: one that sticks to mind is that most of us who work in developing websites are often way too obsessed with Google’s power and the pagerank it gives to a website.

And ironically, since my post last week wondering whether Google was updating, Matt Cutts (more slobbering here, Quimby....) has, for the first time ever, recently posted a clarification on Google’s policy towards pagerank. To quote a couple of segments relevant to our own questions at JOAB-:

If you don’t care about PageRank and your site is doing well, that’s fine by me.

I believe that I’ve said before that PageRank is computed continuously; there are machines that take inputs to the PageRank algorithm at Google and compute the resulting PageRanks. So at any given time, a url in Google’s system has up-to-date PageRank as a result of running the computation with the inputs to the algorithm.

I’m not sure if I’ve given the official word on a PageRank export before. It’s not a big event here at Google. Frankly, I didn’t even know we’d done our 3-4 month-ish push of this data. When I saw people talking about it online, I went to check and see whether it was a real push or not.

So while you may be happy to see that the Google Toolbar shows a little more PageRank for a given page, it’s not as if that causes a change in search results at that point. So you won’t see any search engine result page (SERP) changes as a result of this PageRank export–those changes have been gradually baking in since the last PageRank export.

If you are like me- then you spend way too much time in front of your comp. You have probably let some other part of your life slip- maybe your health or your relationships. A lack of balance usually comes hand in hand with a lack of perspective. Personally I justify it as “temporary” and that I’m doing it “because I have to“, i.e: for the money.

Hmmm. Maybe that’s a load of codswallop. Maybe I can earn less money and have more fun. Maybe I could be happier as a person with a more rounded life if I stopped worrying so much about money. I hate letting anyone down, but just sometimes the darned emails can wait….

Good old Benjamin Franklin reputedly changed the word “profit” to “happiness“, as in “the pursuit of….” while drawing up The Constitution. Point being- money does not bring happiness.

It’s not just a cliché told by the rich to the poor, it’s the truth. For those of you who have not had the chance to witness the irony of seeing rich people you know personally- utterly miserable, or the smiley, innocent disposition of people in the Third World who are dirt poor, there is an excellent illustration of this concept by an old school chum of mine, Alain De Botton, in his book “The Consolations Of Philosophy“. Below, is part of his reflection on the teachings of Epicurus.

1. Identify a project for happiness.

In order to be happy on holiday, I must live in a villa

2. Imagine that the project may be false. Look for exceptions to the supposed link between the desired object and happiness. Could one possess the desired object but not be happy? Could one be happy but not have the desired object?

Could I spend money on a villa and still not be happy?

Could I be happy on holiday and not spend as much money as on a villa?

3. If an exception is found, the desired object cannot be a necessary and sufficient cause of happiness.

It is possible to have a miserable time in a villa if, for example, I feel friendless and isolated?

It is possible for me to be happy in a tent if, for example, I am with someone I love and feel appreciated by?

4. In order to be accurate about producing happiness, the initial

project must be nuanced to take the exception into account.

In so far as I can be happy in an expensive villa, this depends on being with someone I love and feel appreciated by.

I can be happy without spending money on a villa, as long as I am with someone I love and feel appreciated by.

5. True needs may now seem very different from the confused initial desire.

Happiness depends more on the possession of a congenial companion than a well-decorated villa.

Epicurus himself sums it up best:

The possession of the greatest riches does not resolve the agitation of the soul nor give birth to remarkable joy

As of this week, the One Big Network, brainchild of celebrity cowboy- David Krug, and former owner of Jack Of All Blogs, has officially launched.

Here is the press release going out:

One Big Opportunity

Do you have expert knowledge, but often find yourself struggling to create new quality content for the web? If yes, then you’re not alone.

There’s gotta be another way, right? Well, we think so.

The web is full of content. Lots of it is really bad information. Being an expert doesn’t necessarily require that you create new content. What we need now more than ever are experts who can pick out the best content on the web.

That’s where you come in.

The process is simple. Begin by choosing a topic of interest. Then, go out and find the best, most authoritive sites on your topic (start by finding 9-12 sites). Each authority site should have a feed for its latest content. Your site will simply feature the latest headlines from each site that you deem an “authority.” In other words, you’ll be making a portal or hub of expert information about your topic. Constantly updated…automatically. And you can make money from it too!

Sound too good to be true?

The OneBig Network is enabling just this kind of site…with the added benefit of network leverage. Our method gives you an easy way to make money without the daily grind. All the work is upfront, and then you just sit back. Our system constantly updates the latest headlines from each authority site, making your OneBig site an authoritive, relevant, up to the minute snapshot of the best the web has to offer on your particular topic.

So if you’re struggling to generate new content for your blogs or content sties, why not try building expert sites that highlight the best feeds on your favorite topics. Not only will you be providing a valuable service to those who share your interests, but you’ll also be creating a unique opportunity for the best kind of income…the sit back and relax kind!

For only $250 you can join the OneBig network which includes a fully functional site template, a custom designed header graphic, and total participation in the OneBig Network. Lots of benefits. Zero risk. Why wait?

If anyone is interested in joining the One Big Network, please fill out the contact form: here.

The Bloggy Network has bought four sites, which you can view as samples of “niche areas” covered.

One Big Daddy

One Big Hacker

One Big Sport

One Big Japan

Seems that the much awaited Google pagerank update may be underway. Check out your website, especially if it is new at the various datacenters-: here.

A good example includes WebmasterWorld.com, which is moving from a PR7 to a PR8. Many sites, although unstable and unpredictable at this time, appear to be holding onto current rankings. JOAB, for instance, is still a solid PR6. Amongst the early losers, there appears to be some downgrades on some well known, recently sold blogs from PR6s to PR5s, but nothing too drastic as of yet.

Bloggy Network can be pretty satisfied with the first glimpses of this update. For its homepage, an out of the box PR5, as well as for some its related sites, like Bloggy Hosting. And out of the box PR4s for its newest additions, like: Charities Blog, Travel Blog and Hollywood Blog.

So hang on to your undies and watch those toolbars and SERPs!