I was surprised that some Kossacs' felt offense regarding my upset at finding myself endorsing an anti-smoking aide I did not know existed.
As I read the comments, I realized that many people did not understand my issue, which was not with the Daily Kos, but rather, with the ad firm that felt it o.k to use my experience to sell products I did not use without consulting me.
Silly me thought to warn the Kos community of this. Although I did get support and help from some, many people thought only of how the Kos is not at fault.
It is a problem that so many people do think that it is o.k. for personal ideas, thoughts, and works to go into a collective no one receives credit for, while large companies profit from words rendered anonymous by fine print on a social news site.
Google Under Investigation for Illegal Ad...
U.S. Copyright Office
Here is my issue, again. I found my Kos diary selling a product I did not endorse.
Yes, it is nice to see my work somewhere other than where I put it.Yes, I want Kos news to spread quickly, as I am a Kos contributer. Yes, I am tickled that a bot or webmaster "picked" my work, maybe that does mean I am "good". Yes, I do want my works and name to be known. Yes, I do understand that everything put on line is "up for grabs", especially from social sites. That does not make it right or legal.
I also understand that to be a successful writer (that means paid) I need to use the internet. I will not let my name be ruined endorsing a faulty product because the Kos's fine print said it was O.K. for an ad company to use my personal experience without consulting me. This is as "not cool" as using my child's picture without permission from facebook to sell cereal.
(I am going to be nice, here, and suppose that the Daily Kos has that clause to prevent me from suing them over something like this, in addition to encouraging instant awareness of Liberal news.)
Point One My name is my name. It is the same on facebook and on YouTube and beyond. To be a credible person, and thus a paid one, one's name must be good, in both worlds. Endorsing products can ruin my name.
Point Two Copyright Law, which is simple, and supersedes Kos's fine print. This is a big issue in today's culture, and probably why some insisted on shielding Kos from the issue. This topic splinters into thousands of internet issues, from iTunes to my blog. All of which equates to income inequality.
U.S. Copyright Office
Point Three My series, Pro's and Contests, which I intend to use as part of my online writer's portfolio. This is an informative article for Kossac's who desire publication. It features current submission standards. This is serious business for my name, for my community, and for my future finances. I cannot cut and paste "any purpose" when one asks me to explain the difference between un-published and published.
Point Four Income inequality. It is my right to be paid for my work. I am/have been/will be jumping through all the hoops linking life together. I understand and accept that I must play the game in order to get ahead and that it's not fair. It is the never ending game I have a problem with. It is that I played well to get insulted while bending over.
This situation is a good example of my issue. I am marketable enough for ad companies in Canada and Pakistan to use my words and my image for marketing. They don't have to pay me, due to the Kos fine print, and YouTube fine print, but it is agreed that I am marketable in two different venues.
Let me go a step further. Why, then, would Google Adsense invalidate my account (after soliciting me to place Google ads on my blog) due to too many ad click-thru's on my blog? Google Adsense told me I was not marketable enough to have that much traffic and that the ratio of my ad clicks were disproportionate to all the other percentages that are so important it is illegal for me to disclose the actual data of. I am only allowed to make general references the statistics determining how much or if I am paid. This means I am not allowed to enter this financial data I pay taxes on as evidence in legal proceedings.
To restate my rant: Google Adsense told me that I made too much money. ($20.00) Then, Google put my name into their system of destruction and managed to cost me a thousand real life dollars in a month in various ways using illegal internet programs akin to same ad system that is making money off of both of my words and my face.
Google sued, again.
Your data is important to Google.
Google under government inspection.
Those links should be enough for anyone to understand why I am upset to find myself selling stuff to Canadians.
So yes, it disturbs me that I am not profiting from my name, works and image, which proved to be marketable. It disturbs me that I don't know what these products are and if they work. It disturbs me that most people don't really know how computers and phones and Google works. Why use technology one understands barely enough to turn on? It is ironic that this issue involves comments like, "anypurposes", and the right to post one's ignorance so freely online.
This is not something that is "cool" to accept and deal with. "Just because" is the answer parents give, not governments, financial institutions, corporations, and web sites, who are accountable. If I have to whine and nag about my rights in order to put food on my table, I will. I have desperation to make my voice as shrill as possible, so at least people will understand that this is a legitimate issue.
With this writerly knowledge in hand, I came online over 4 years ago to create my name and portfolio, as instructed by my gods: Sony, Glimmertrain, Harpers Journal, and Dr. Yoshino. Have I ever mentioned that I am/was a technophobe? Above is an example why.