Connect with us

SEO

NFTs & Copyright: What Do You Own?

Published

on

NFTs & Copyright: What Do You Own?

NFTs (non-fungible tokens) are becoming an increasingly popular way for individuals and brands to profit from their digital creations.

And it’s easy to see why.

You create a unique digital asset, like a piece of art, and then you tokenize it to prove your ownership of it.

More and more creators are turning to NFTs to help verify authenticity and minimize fraud. Non-fungible tokens have even become the currency of choice in the metaverse.

But what happens once an NFT is sold? Who actually owns the copyright – the original creator or the new owner? And how do copyright laws and IP rights apply?

Advertisement

Understanding NFTs

To find out where the discrepancies and confusion lie in NFT copyright, it’s helpful to go back to basics to understand what NFTs are.

NFTs are digital assets containing unique identification codes that verify ownership. These digital assets range from art, music, and photos to collectibles like comic books, trading cards, and in-game items.

While fungible assets like currency and cryptocurrency can be traded and exchanged, each NFT contains a unique digital signature.

This means that no two NFTs are alike, and so they can’t be replaced or interchanged with each other. That’s the difference between fungible and non-fungible.

Like cryptocurrency, non-fungible tokens or NFTs are stored on blockchain technology – a public ledger that secures information in a way that makes it impossible to hack.

Thanks to the unique identification codes contained within each NFT, they can be easily verified and authenticated to prove ownership.

Advertisement

Even though NFTs have the technology for ownership, there is still confusion surrounding copyright law.

How Does Copyright Legislation Apply To NFTs?

Let’s take a look at the Hermès case.

In November 2021, Hermès sued artist Mason Rothschild (real name Sonny Estival) for creating a faux fur line of NFTs inspired by its most famous and recognizable luxury bag: the Birkin.

Named the MetaBirkins, the line competed directly with Hermès and its own plans for NFTs. According to the company’s lawsuit, this confused its customers and diluted its brand.

Rothschild’s defense? That his work was social commentary and therefore protected by freedom of artistic expression.

The jury didn’t buy it and awarded the suit in favor of Hermès. Their judgment was that the NFTs were in breach of copyright law, including trademark dilution and infringement. All of which ended up costing $133,000 in damages.

Advertisement

An expensive lesson for Rothschild and an important legal precedent for NFTs and copyright law.

Who Owns The Intellectual Property Of An NFT?

It’s evident that many brands, including notable luxury brands like Dolce & Gabbana, Tiffany & Co., Gucci, and more, are beginning to explore the potential of non-fungible tokens.

This means that it’s becoming more important to understand where creativity ends, and copyright protection begins.

Because while buying an NFT gives the owner certain rights, complete creative control isn’t one of them – not unless the copyright holder takes active steps to ensure this, which is rarely done.

Understanding Copyright Protection

As the copyright owner, you have the exclusive right to reproduce and display your work – unless you choose to transfer the copyright or grant a license to the buyer.

But do these same laws apply to NFTs? These are the questions that are currently being asked.

Advertisement

If creating a non-fungible token is defined as copying or reproducing the original work in any way, then under copyright law (at least in the U.S.), the copyright holder is the only one who should legally be allowed to do so.

However, making copies of works now is much easier and cheaper than it was before the Internet existed. Today a simple right-click is all it takes, whereas previously, creating copies actually took time, money, and effort.

This is why copyright law used to be a serious consideration and, today, is barely given a second thought.

What Do You Own When You Buy NFTs?

It’s a good question.

Just because you buy a non-fungible token doesn’t mean you automatically own the copyright or even a license. The creator does.

That’s because when you buy NFTs, you’re actually purchasing a digital token – proof of ownership of something. And in some cases, you may only be the part owner of that thing.

Advertisement

Take The Merge, for example – an NFT artwork of 312,686 tokens purchased by 28,983 collectors for a total price of $91.8 million.

Now imagine each of those 28,983 collectors going off separately and reproducing their portion of the same art piece: nightmare.

While the various IP laws of trademark, patent, and copyright can be difficult to understand – particularly how they apply to NFTs – the rules are simple and grounded in common sense.

Don’t copy other people’s work, and always keep your own work safe, as Hermès has recently and powerfully demonstrated.

How Licenses And NFTs Work

Right now, copyright laws and guidelines are still being interrogated and debated.

But if you’re considering purchasing non-fungible tokens or are already an NFT owner, there are some workarounds when it comes to licensing:

Advertisement

Personal License

While you may not hold the copyright yourself, if you’re granted a personal license, you can use your NFT for non-commercial, non-profit means. This could include displaying your artwork in your home or using it as your social media profile picture.

Bear in mind, however, that you won’t be able to use your NFT for commercial gain in any way.

Commercial Rights

Here you will have some commercial rights to your NFT as given to you by the creator. It’s important to remember that they will still have copyright and IP ownership of the original work.

Depending on the specific rights transferred to you, you might be able to sell prints, create merchandise, or even create a TV show.

In the case of the Bored Ape Yacht Club, for example, owners have unrestricted commercial use of their NFT art. (However, there does seem to be some ongoing confusion about its copyright registration, which we’ll leave for another time.)

Aside from personal and commercial licenses, there are other structures in which the buyer of an NFT has to pay royalties to the original creator. So every time the NFT is sold, it generates a passive income for its owner.

Advertisement

William Shatner, for example, sold 125,000 digital photographs on the WAX Blockchain in just 9 minutes and now earns a secondary revenue from their trade.

On the other end of the spectrum, a royalty-free license can do away with needing to pay royalties to the creator. And other alternative licensing structures can grant or deny certain permissions to their owners.

So while copyright laws may have strict guidelines, licenses can help grant particular creative freedoms.

Brands Setting Precedence For NFTs & IP Rights

As we’ve discussed, the Hermès case sets an important legal precedent for luxury brands regarding the unauthorized sale of non-fungible tokens. And it’s more relevant now than ever.

Major brands such as Gucci, Louis Vuitton, Burberry, and more are starting to enter the NFT space, partnering with NFT marketplaces and creating digital collections. And why wouldn’t they?

NFTs allow them to authenticate limited-edition products, extend the lifecycle of their products, and build more sustainable business models.

Advertisement

It’s no wonder, then, that brands are optimistic about the potential of NFTs to transform the industry and create new opportunities for growth and innovation.

What Does This Mean For Anyone Creating NFTs?

While NFTs have the potential to change the market and make new opportunities possible, as a brand or a creator, you still need to know your IP rights.

You also need to know about NFTs and understand that just because you’re purchasing one, doesn’t mean you own the underlying IP.

Unless, of course, you’re the original creator.

Instead, non-fungible tokens represent the ownership or rights to a particular underlying asset. And that means creators need to avoid infringing on the IP rights of others.

They also need to implement measures to protect their own IP at the same time.

Advertisement

Otherwise, what’s to stop someone from buying the copyright to an NFT artwork, and then suing the purchaser for making that same artwork their profile picture?

Or copying other works to create NFTs and then ensuring the purchaser has the rights to the work? All while blurring the lines of copyright infringement.

There are far too many grey areas to navigate already without playing fast and loose with the copyright legislation already in place.

So, while the terms of NFT copyright are still being defined, play it safe.

Protect your copyrighted work as a creator or a brand.

Claim resale royalties if the possibility exists for you.

Advertisement

Don’t use your NFTs for commercial gain without the proper licensing.

And never go up against Hermès.

More resources:


Featured Image: Crazy_Dark_Queen/Shutterstock



Source link

Keep an eye on what we are doing
Be the first to get latest updates and exclusive content straight to your email inbox.
We promise not to spam you. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Invalid email address

SEO

Google’s Search Engine Market Share Drops As Competitors’ Grows

Published

on

By

Assorted search engine apps including Google, You.com and Bing are seen on an iPhone. Microsoft plans to use ChatGPT in Bing, and You.com has launched an AI chatbot.

According to data from GS Statcounter, Google’s search engine market share has fallen to 86.99%, the lowest point since the firm began tracking search engine share in 2009.

The drop represents a more than 4% decrease from the previous month, marking the largest single-month decline on record.

Screenshot from: https://gs.statcounter.com/search-engine-market-share/, May 2024.

U.S. Market Impact

The decline is most significant in Google’s key market, the United States, where its share of searches across all devices fell by nearly 10%, reaching 77.52%.

1714669058 226 Googles Search Engine Market Share Drops As Competitors GrowsScreenshot from: https://gs.statcounter.com/search-engine-market-share/, May 2024.

Concurrently, competitors Microsoft Bing and Yahoo Search have seen gains. Bing reached a 13% market share in the U.S. and 5.8% globally, its highest since launching in 2009.

Yahoo Search’s worldwide share nearly tripled to 3.06%, a level not seen since July 2015.

1714669058 375 Googles Search Engine Market Share Drops As Competitors GrowsScreenshot from: https://gs.statcounter.com/search-engine-market-share/, May 2024.

Search Quality Concerns

Many industry experts have recently expressed concerns about the declining quality of Google’s search results.

A portion of the SEO community believes that the search giant’s results have worsened following the latest update.

Advertisement

These concerns have begun to extend to average internet users, who are increasingly voicing complaints about the state of their search results.

Alternative Perspectives

Web analytics platform SimilarWeb provided additional context on X (formerly Twitter), stating that its data for the US for March 2024 suggests Google’s decline may not be as severe as initially reported.

SimilarWeb also highlighted Yahoo’s strong performance, categorizing it as a News and Media platform rather than a direct competitor to Google in the Search Engine category.

Why It Matters

The shifting search engine market trends can impact businesses, marketers, and regular users.

Google has been on top for a long time, shaping how we find things online and how users behave.

However, as its market share drops and other search engines gain popularity, publishers may need to rethink their online strategies and optimize for multiple search platforms besides Google.

Users are becoming vocal about Google’s declining search quality over time. As people start trying alternate search engines, the various platforms must prioritize keeping users satisfied if they want to maintain or grow their market position.

It will be interesting to see how they respond to this boost in market share.

What It Means for SEO Pros

As Google’s competitors gain ground, SEO strategies may need to adapt by accounting for how each search engine’s algorithms and ranking factors work.

Advertisement

This could involve diversifying SEO efforts across multiple platforms and staying up-to-date on best practices for each one.

The increased focus on high-quality search results emphasizes the need to create valuable, user-focused content that meets the needs of the target audience.

SEO pros must prioritize informative, engaging, trustworthy content that meets search engine algorithms and user expectations.

Remain flexible, adaptable, and proactive to navigate these shifts. Keeping a pulse on industry trends, user behaviors, and competing search engine strategies will be key for successful SEO campaigns.


Featured Image: Tada Images/Shutterstock



Source link

Advertisement
Keep an eye on what we are doing
Be the first to get latest updates and exclusive content straight to your email inbox.
We promise not to spam you. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Invalid email address
Continue Reading

SEO

How To Drive Pipeline With A Silo-Free Strategy

Published

on

By

How To Drive Pipeline With A Silo-Free Strategy

When it comes to B2B strategy, a holistic approach is the only approach. 

Revenue organizations usually operate with siloed teams, and often expect a one-size-fits-all solution (usually buying clicks with paid media). 

However, without cohesive brand, infrastructure, and pipeline generation efforts, they’re pretty much doomed to fail. 

It’s just like rowing crew, where each member of the team must synchronize their movements to propel the boat forward – successful B2B marketing requires an integrated strategy. 

So if you’re ready to ditch your disjointed marketing efforts and try a holistic approach, we’ve got you covered.

Advertisement

Join us on May 15, for an insightful live session with Digital Reach Agency on how to craft a compelling brand and PMF. 

We’ll walk through the critical infrastructure you need, and the reliances and dependences of the core digital marketing disciplines.

Key takeaways from this webinar:

  • Thinking Beyond Traditional Silos: Learn why traditional marketing silos are no longer viable and how they spell doom for modern revenue organizations.
  • How To Identify and Fix Silos: Discover actionable strategies for pinpointing and sealing the gaps in your marketing silos. 
  • The Power of Integration: Uncover the secrets to successfully integrating brand strategy, digital infrastructure, and pipeline generation efforts.

Ben Childs, President and Founder of Digital Reach Agency, and Jordan Gibson, Head of Growth at Digital Reach Agency, will show you how to seamlessly integrate various elements of your marketing strategy for optimal results.

Don’t make the common mistake of using traditional marketing silos – sign up now and learn what it takes to transform your B2B go-to-market.

You’ll also get the opportunity to ask Ben and Jordan your most pressing questions, following the presentation.

And if you can’t make it to the live event, register anyway and we’ll send you a recording shortly after the webinar. 

Advertisement

Source link

Keep an eye on what we are doing
Be the first to get latest updates and exclusive content straight to your email inbox.
We promise not to spam you. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Invalid email address
Continue Reading

SEO

Why Big Companies Make Bad Content

Published

on

Why Big Companies Make Bad Content

It’s like death and taxes: inevitable. The bigger a company gets, the worse its content marketing becomes.

HubSpot teaching you how to type the shrug emoji or buy bitcoin stock. Salesforce sharing inspiring business quotes. GoDaddy helping you use Bing AI, or Zendesk sharing catchy sales slogans.

Judged by content marketing best practice, these articles are bad.

They won’t resonate with decision-makers. Nobody will buy a HubSpot license after Googling “how to buy bitcoin stock.” It’s the very definition of vanity traffic: tons of visits with no obvious impact on the business.

So why does this happen?

Advertisement
I did a double-take the first time I discovered this article on the HubSpot blog.

There’s an obvious (but flawed) answer to this question: big companies are inefficient.

As companies grow, they become more complicated, and writing good, relevant content becomes harder. I’ve experienced this firsthand:

  • extra rounds of legal review and stakeholder approval creeping into processes.
  • content watered down to serve an ever-more generic “brand voice”.
  • growing misalignment between search and content teams.
  • a lack of content leadership within the company as early employees leave.
Why Big Companies Make Bad ContentWhy Big Companies Make Bad Content
As companies grow, content workflows can get kinda… complicated.

Similarly, funded companies have to grow, even when they’re already huge. Content has to feed the machine, continually increasing traffic… even if that traffic never contributes to the bottom line.

There’s an element of truth here, but I’ve come to think that both these arguments are naive, and certainly not the whole story.

It is wrong to assume that the same people that grew the company suddenly forgot everything they once knew about content, and wrong to assume that companies willfully target useless keywords just to game their OKRs.

Instead, let’s assume that this strategy is deliberate, and not oversight. I think bad content—and the vanity traffic it generates—is actually good for business.

Advertisement

There are benefits to driving tons of traffic, even if that traffic never directly converts. Or put in meme format:

Why Big Companies Make Bad ContentWhy Big Companies Make Bad Content

Programmatic SEO is a good example. Why does Dialpad create landing pages for local phone numbers?

1714584366 91 Why Big Companies Make Bad Content1714584366 91 Why Big Companies Make Bad Content

Why does Wise target exchange rate keywords?

1714584366 253 Why Big Companies Make Bad Content1714584366 253 Why Big Companies Make Bad Content

Why do we have a list of most popular websites pages?

1714584367 988 Why Big Companies Make Bad Content1714584367 988 Why Big Companies Make Bad Content

As this Twitter user points out, these articles will never convert…

…but they don’t need to.

Every published URL and targeted keyword is a new doorway from the backwaters of the internet into your website. It’s a chance to acquire backlinks that wouldn’t otherwise exist, and an opportunity to get your brand in front of thousands of new, otherwise unfamiliar people.

These benefits might not directly translate into revenue, but over time, in aggregate, they can have a huge indirect impact on revenue. They can:

Advertisement
  • Strengthen domain authority and the search performance of every other page on the website.
  • Boost brand awareness, and encourage serendipitous interactions that land your brand in front of the right person at the right time.
  • Deny your competitors traffic and dilute their share of voice.

These small benefits become more worthwhile when multiplied across many hundreds or thousands of pages. If you can minimize the cost of the content, there is relatively little downside.

What about topical authority?

“But what about topical authority?!” I hear you cry. “If you stray too far from your area of expertise, won’t rankings suffer for it?”

I reply simply with this screenshot of Forbes’ “health” subfolder, generating almost 4 million estimated monthly organic pageviews:

1714584367 695 Why Big Companies Make Bad Content1714584367 695 Why Big Companies Make Bad Content

And big companies can minimize cost. For large, established brands, the marginal cost of content creation is relatively low.

Many companies scale their output through networks of freelancer writers, avoiding the cost of fully loaded employees. They have established, efficient processes for research, briefing, editorial review, publication and maintenance. The cost of an additional “unit” of content—or ten, or a hundred—is not that great, especially relative to other marketing channels.

There is also relatively little opportunity cost to consider: the fact that energy spent on “vanity” traffic could be better spent elsewhere, on more business-relevant topics.

Advertisement

In reality, many of the companies engaging in this strategy have already plucked the low-hanging fruit and written almost every product-relevant topic. There are a finite number of high traffic, high relevance topics; blog consistently for a decade and you too will reach these limits.

On top of that, the HubSpots and Salesforces of the world have very established, very efficient sales processes. Content gating, lead capture and scoring, and retargeting allow them to put very small conversion rates to relatively good use.

1714584367 376 Why Big Companies Make Bad Content1714584367 376 Why Big Companies Make Bad Content

Even HubSpot’s article on Bitcoin stock has its own relevant call-to-action—and for HubSpot, building a database of aspiring investors is more valuable than it sounds, because…

The bigger a company grows, the bigger its audience needs to be to continue sustaining that growth rate.

Companies generally expand their total addressable market (TAM) as they grow, like HubSpot broadening from marketing to sales and customer success, launching new product lines for new—much bigger—audiences. This means the target audience for their content marketing grows alongside.

As Peep Laja put its:

Advertisement

But for the biggest companies, this principle is taken to an extreme. When a company gears up to IPO, its target audience expands to… pretty much everyone.

This was something Janessa Lantz (ex-HubSpot and dbt Labs) helped me understand: the target audience for a post-IPO company is not just end users, but institutional investors, market analysts, journalists, even regular Jane investors.

These are people who can influence the company’s worth in ways beyond simply buying a subscription: they can invest or encourage others to invest and dramatically influence the share price. These people are influenced by billboards, OOH advertising and, you guessed it, seemingly “bad” content showing up whenever they Google something.

Advertisement

You can think of this as a second, additional marketing funnel for post-IPO companies:

Illustration: When companies IPO, the traditional marketing funnel is accompanied by a second funnel. Website visitors contribute value through stock appreciation, not just revenue.Illustration: When companies IPO, the traditional marketing funnel is accompanied by a second funnel. Website visitors contribute value through stock appreciation, not just revenue.

These visitors might not purchase a software subscription when they see your article in the SERP, but they will notice your brand, and maybe listen more attentively the next time your stock ticker appears on the news.

They won’t become power users, but they might download your eBook and add an extra unit to the email subscribers reported in your S1.

They might not contribute revenue now, but they will in the future: in the form of stock appreciation, or becoming the target audience for a future product line.

Vanity traffic does create value, but in a form most content marketers are not used to measuring.

If any of these benefits apply, then it makes sense to acquire them for your company—but also to deny them to your competitors.

Advertisement

SEO is an arms race: there are a finite number of keywords and topics, and leaving a rival to claim hundreds, even thousands of SERPs uncontested could very quickly create a headache for your company.

SEO can quickly create a moat of backlinks and brand awareness that can be virtually impossible to challenge; left unchecked, the gap between your company and your rival can accelerate at an accelerating pace.

Pumping out “bad” content and chasing vanity traffic is a chance to deny your rivals unchallenged share of voice, and make sure your brand always has a seat at the table.

Final thoughts

These types of articles are miscategorized—instead of thinking of them as bad content, it’s better to think of them as cheap digital billboards with surprisingly great attribution.

Big companies chasing “vanity traffic” isn’t an accident or oversight—there are good reasons to invest energy into content that will never convert. There is benefit, just not in the format most content marketers are used to.

This is not an argument to suggest that every company should invest in hyper-broad, high-traffic keywords. But if you’ve been blogging for a decade, or you’re gearing up for an IPO, then “bad content” and the vanity traffic it creates might not be so bad.

Advertisement



Source link

Keep an eye on what we are doing
Be the first to get latest updates and exclusive content straight to your email inbox.
We promise not to spam you. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Invalid email address
Continue Reading

Trending

Follow by Email
RSS