Mon 10 Mar 2008
Does that content belong to you?
Posted by Marlow Harris under Computer & Internet, Real Estate
Many of us have our own websites that we have created ourselves. They belong to us, not our company or brokerage or web host, right?
A few years ago, as an experiment, I purchased a “Connecting Neighbors” website. I was intrigued by the interactive nature of the site and I loved the automatic monthly newsletters that I could adapt to my own chosen neighborhood. It was a template site, yet allowed for a good deal of customization. I could create pages and content, including neighborhood photos, school info, entertainment, arts, events, recipes and local real estate.
And I did that. I added photos of local restaurants and shops, parks, schools and events. I added stories about neighborhood happenings and highlighted local fund-raisers, pancake breakfasts and lasagna dinners. I added new listings as they became available, and I added hundreds of links to local and neighborhood websites that would be of interest to those who lived in or who were relocating to the neighborhood.
The coolest thing about the website was that, theoretically, after it was set up, you wouldn’t have to do anything. Because it was interactive, readers could add their own content without being registered, and Connecting Neighbors would monitor the content for anything that was inappropriate. Readers could add information about their church picnic or the winner of the local elementary schools soccer match. It actually worked pretty well.
The cost of the website with the automatic newsletter mailing was $39.95 a month, and I had thought it worth-while if I had been able to get a critical mass of readers together to keep it fresh and updated.
Alas, I could not, and it was up to me to continually add content.
When they raised the price in January to $59.95 a month, I thought it time to bail and just chalk it up to a lesson learned.
However, when I went to cancel, they kept the site live.
When I pointed out to them that I had cancelled the website, I was told by a representative of the company: “Please note the website still remains live online so it can be resold by our sales team.”
I was shocked. They had removed my name, photo and contact information from the site, but kept the name and all of the original content and photos online and they were attempting to market it, fully customized, to another real estate agent.
Of course, I couldn’t let that happen. Fortunately, I was still able to access the site, so I could delete all of the photos and original content and add my own disclaimer to alert any unwary agent in the future that the website contained content that I had compiled and created.
Luckily, I also owned the domain name, so I was able to redirect that to another page I had created, but I’m guessing other unwitting real estate agents may not be able to do that and they may become a victim of this company. Respected names in the real estate industry, including Michael Russer and Allen Hainge, are partners with Connecting Neighbors, and I hope they will look into this unfair practice so other agents are not victimized by their actions.
Connecting Neighbors urges agents to purchase not only the website through them, but the domain as well. Hence, when the website is discontinued, Connecting Neighbors can just sell that site to another agent, even though it may be a very elaborate site, with a customized look, feel and brand, created by one particular agent. Nothing belongs to the agent, it’s all owned by Connecting Neighbors, even if created by the purchaser. This is good to know if you’re considering working with this company. It’s potentially a valuable product, but may not be worth the cost in the long run since once you start with them, they can just raise the price and if you discontinue, all your hard work, branding and unique domain name can then be sold to another.
The right thing to do would be to just take the website offline when the service was cancelled and not try to resell the site to another before removing all of the custom content.
9 Responses to “ Does that content belong to you? ”
Comments:
Leave a Reply
Trackbacks & Pingbacks:
-
Pingback from Does that content belong to you? | The Long List of Odysseus Medal Nominees | Realtors and real estate, mortgages, lending, investments
March 10th, 2008 at 7:21 am[...] Does that content belong to you?, by Marlow Harris. [...]



March 10th, 2008 at 6:01 am
What an example of why professionals should obtain their own domain names (heck, they’re cheap) to at least keep some control.
That’s a significant increase in fee. I wonder if it was because of fewer subscribers?
March 10th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
Same thing happened to me with myplanowest.com, it’s stills lives, but no agents have taken the bait. It’s a different company from 4 years ago. I’ve learned to really check out the real estate vendors promoted because many of the products are not really current. There are much better solutions to use outside the industry, don’t you think?
March 11th, 2008 at 6:13 am
I have always resisted solicitations by unknown entities, thinking I did not know enough to stay out of trouble. Now it appears that even seasoned technophiles can land in difficult places. Luckily, you knew how to work around their unscrupulous practices. Ha!
Lately, I have noticed a marked increase in the number of solicitations I receive from real estate vendors. Could it be that agents who cannot survive a downturn try working another angle?
March 11th, 2008 at 6:35 am
Marlow,
I used Connecting Neighbors for about a year and found some of the same issues. I did manage to extricate myself after a year. I did not want to keep the same domain name because I wanted a new start that was not canned for my neighborhood blog. I let them keep the domain name and I created a new one.
When I first encountered the site, I had similar thoughts as you did. However, after a while, I realized how canned the site appeared to be. I think this may have had something to do with the lack of community interest.
March 11th, 2008 at 10:49 am
I was contacted by a representative of Connecting Neighbors by phone today, and she said the reason my site was not taken offline was that the person responsible for doing that was out of the office. For three weeks.
However, according to their terms of service, they believe they have the right to an “irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, fully paid, unrestricted, worldwide license to use, copy, perform, display, and distribute said Content”.
To wit:
“Although CN does not claim ownership of content that its users post, by posting Content to any public area of the Service, you automatically grant, and you represent and warrant that you have the right to grant, to CN an irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, fully paid, unrestricted, worldwide license to use, copy, perform, display, and distribute said Content and to prepare derivative works of, or incorporate into other works, said Content, and to grant and authorize sublicenses (through multiple tiers) of the foregoing. The foregoing grants shall include the right to exploit any proprietary rights in such Communication, including but not limited to rights under copyright, trademark, service mark, or patent laws under any relevant jurisdiction.”
March 26th, 2008 at 5:57 am
I had two community websites that I ran for a couple of years. I have discontinued both. The problem with these websites is that the agent has to do a tremendous amount of work to keep market, add content, etc. Theoretically the community should be populating the content, in reality many homeowners in communities have better things to do….therefore it falls back onto the agent. I’m sure there are exceptions, but I would rather spend my time selling homes vs being a web developer for Connecting Neighbors…..the reality is (& this can be hard to believe) the Realtor position pays more!
March 27th, 2008 at 8:46 am
One issue that may end up as a huge problem for “CN” is if you license content from another person, lets say, a photo. Regardless of what CN “thinks” they probably don’t have a license for use if they did not receive one from the copyright holder.
This means that if you licensed use of my picture of the nice pond and then CN resells the site after you close it, I can take action against CN.
How? you may ask. Easy. There’s no privity between CN and me. I contracted with you, not CN. They can put anything they want in their agreement and it doesn’t make it more enforceable than any other adhesion contract. I didn’t agree and am not bound by their terms. Since my terms don’t allow you to transfer the license, there’s no way they can claim the right to use the picture.
Why do I know this? I’m a business attorney in Snohomish County and have addressed “similar” issues.
March 30th, 2008 at 7:12 pm
I have tried the hyper-local subdivision-specific blogging multiple times and have failed to generate much traffic.
I think people are just plain too busy and don’t care.
Plus, it is probably too tightly-targeted.
Fortunately, I have developed my own sites/blogs and didn’t fall for the CN sales pitch.