Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AOL Exposed: A Former AOL Employee Speaks Out

thefastertimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 124 posts

Re: AOL Exposed: A Former AOL Employee Speaks Out

#101

Post by [deleted] »

tptacek wrote: post #77
chopsueyar wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not the only criteria. See this comment: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2666507 The other issue is, as a contractor, the contractor retains all copyrights to the material created. Work for hire does not apply in this instance. He could send a DMCA takedown notice and have all of his articles removed, or organize all the other unemployed writers and coordinate a massive DMCA takedown letter writing campai…

Virtually all contractors in our field work under "work-for-hire" clauses. I am baffled by the people voting you up and those questioning you down. It is not "in the Constitution" that two parties can't agree to a binding contract that transfers ownership of work product. The IRS tests for contractor vs. employee status break down to: * Does the worker control the "how" as well as the "what" of their task, or do they…

[deleted]

Re: AOL Exposed: A Former AOL Employee Speaks Out

#102

Post by rbanffy »

Animus7 wrote: post #94
Legion wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I pay for publications like The Economist and The Atlantic (both of which I read entirely digitally) for exactly that reason. I want quality content when I sit down to spend my precious reading time on something. I can hardly imagine spending that time reading insipid, content mill junk. Who puts so low of a value on their time?

>Who puts so low of a value on their time? Sadly, lot of people, it would seem. AOL's still in business.

The intersection of good journalism and articles about Lady Gaga is a very small set.

Re: AOL Exposed: A Former AOL Employee Speaks Out

#103

Post by antihero »

SemanticFog wrote: post #21

There's nothing unique to AOL here. When I first got out of college, I interviewed at local newspapers up and down the east coast. Entry level jobs had awful pay, about $15K/yr, but it was a chance to break in to the business. One grizzled editor chain smoked cigarettes through our interview (you could do that in the office back then). He listened to me describe why I wanted to write. Then he leaned back, blew a clou…

That's a fantastic quote.

Re: AOL Exposed: A Former AOL Employee Speaks Out

#104

Post by rbanffy »

MatthewPhillips wrote: post #11

This just makes me think: why in the world would any one want to become a writer these days? There isn't much money in it, unless you get lucky and hit it big. I understanding having a passion, but this is one passion that should be relegated to hobby time. Am I wrong on this? I'm just not seeing the economic viability of writing sentences and having people (whether readers or advertisers) paying you proportionate to…

Sadly, you are wrong. Democracy relies on good journalism to inform the people. Good journalism cannot be done as a hobby.

Re: AOL Exposed: A Former AOL Employee Speaks Out

#105

Post by grellas »

chopsueyar wrote: post #12
aresant wrote: post #3

"AOL paid us as “independent contractors," AOL is treading a fine, fine line there. The IRS defines an independent contractor as: "The general rule is that an individual is an independent contractor if the payer has the right to control or direct only the result of the work and not what will be done and how it will be done." This is a notoriously ambiguous definition but with AOL's rigorous guidelines, deadlines, and…

That is not the only criteria. See this comment: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2666507 The other issue is, as a contractor, the contractor retains all copyrights to the material created. Work for hire does not apply in this instance. He could send a DMCA takedown notice and have all of his articles removed, or organize all the other unemployed writers and coordinate a massive DMCA takedown letter writing campai…

It is true that a contractor generally retains ownership in any original work of authorship but AOL, in paying for the work, would get an implied license to publish that work as intended by the contract - that is its point in paying for it (much as any website owner who might fail to secure copyrights from a contractor who does work for his site, though he may not own the rights or be able to prevent the contractor from re-using the work elsewhere, nonetheless may use it for his own site in having paid for the work for that purpose). Thus, A DMCA takedown notice could not be used to remove any of the articles.

Contracts of this type also would normally be expressly framed as work-for-hire contracts and would also provide for the assignment of all rights to work that did not technically meet the criteria of works made for hire. Such clauses are valid and enforceable and are indeed a staple of every tech developers invention-assignment agreement. They apply with equal force to works of authorship by an independent writer. Assuming the contract here is so framed, AOL would own the copyrights in the works of the author.

The employee-contractor question, on the other hand, is a tricky one. This is a murky area but one where, generally, the lower the skill level and the more the worker must abide by company-defined procedures and schedule in how the work is done (among many other factors), the greater the risk of being classified as an employee. Many writers work independently with no risk to anyone of their being treated as employees but the AOL situation described in this piece might be vulnerable to audit risks owing to its assembly-line aspects. Hard to say without knowing a lot more detail.

Re: AOL Exposed: A Former AOL Employee Speaks Out

#106

Post by aj700 »

"AOL has a plan. The plan involves the future;"

Okay, but the future has a plan. The plan doesn't involve AOL. This and the fact they refuse to cancel your account. What a pathetic company. Good job stockholders are dumb.

Every bonus taking banker raped the banks' stockholders. But nobody seems to care. Stockholders come bottom, behind customers, employees, and bigger creditors. It's not quite how capitalism was supposed to work.

Re: AOL Exposed: A Former AOL Employee Speaks Out

#107

Post by afterburner »

afterburner wrote: post #43

Side note: Lady Gaga is pantless everywhere. So, a good and safe choice of words.

Haha, of course a downvote. No, really, she's pantless everywhere. This is not a joke. Maybe the AOL writer who came up with that example knew what they were doing; I thought it was an interesting possibility.

Re: AOL Exposed: A Former AOL Employee Speaks Out

#108

Post by chopsueyar »

grellas wrote: post #105
chopsueyar wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not the only criteria. See this comment: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2666507 The other issue is, as a contractor, the contractor retains all copyrights to the material created. Work for hire does not apply in this instance. He could send a DMCA takedown notice and have all of his articles removed, or organize all the other unemployed writers and coordinate a massive DMCA takedown letter writing campai…

It is true that a contractor generally retains ownership in any original work of authorship but AOL, in paying for the work, would get an implied license to publish that work as intended by the contract - that is its point in paying for it (much as any website owner who might fail to secure copyrights from a contractor who does work for his site, though he may not own the rights or be able to prevent the contractor f…

Thank you for the clarification.

Re: AOL Exposed: A Former AOL Employee Speaks Out

#110

Post by ChuckFrank »

corin_ wrote: post #68
ChuckFrank wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who leads your list?

I work for a small company that runs content sites, profitably

Sure there will be small content companies in all mediums, but you can't be a big single media content creator. You need to create other revenue venues over multiple channels. Besides, instead of just telling us, show us ... what site do you work for?
Post reply on HN