ITEM: Ars Technica reports on the trend of doctors and dentists asking prospective patients to sign forms saying that the copyright on anything they post on the Web about the doctor/dentist’s treatment will become the legal property of the doctor/dentist that treated you.
Put another way: once you sign the form, they own the copyright on any blog post you do about them and the treatment. Which would mean, for example, they could force you to remove a critical post on the grounds of copyright violations.
The good news is that legal experts say doctors would have a hard time making it stick legally if they actually took that route. The bad news is the fact that doctors and other medical professionals even think this is a good and sensible idea.
To be fair, the supposed goal of the waiver is to give doctors the power to fight fraudulent reviews of their practice (posted by, say, ruthless competitors or disgruntled employees), not simply censor bad reviews. On the other hand, “fraudulent” could mean “Anything that makes me look bad or lowers my Yelp rating”. Maybe those of you in the medical profession can give a better perspective on the necessity of this kind of thing.
But either way, it’s just ludicrous to claim that the subject of any article owns the copyright to that article. If a doctor or dentist handed me a form like that, I’d do what the guy at Ars Technica did – look for a new doctor or dentist.
Anyway, the whole article is worth reading, if only to see just how weird things are getting in the Digital Kingdom Of Fear.
Sign here,
This is dF
Put another way: once you sign the form, they own the copyright on any blog post you do about them and the treatment. Which would mean, for example, they could force you to remove a critical post on the grounds of copyright violations.
The good news is that legal experts say doctors would have a hard time making it stick legally if they actually took that route. The bad news is the fact that doctors and other medical professionals even think this is a good and sensible idea.
To be fair, the supposed goal of the waiver is to give doctors the power to fight fraudulent reviews of their practice (posted by, say, ruthless competitors or disgruntled employees), not simply censor bad reviews. On the other hand, “fraudulent” could mean “Anything that makes me look bad or lowers my Yelp rating”. Maybe those of you in the medical profession can give a better perspective on the necessity of this kind of thing.
But either way, it’s just ludicrous to claim that the subject of any article owns the copyright to that article. If a doctor or dentist handed me a form like that, I’d do what the guy at Ars Technica did – look for a new doctor or dentist.
Anyway, the whole article is worth reading, if only to see just how weird things are getting in the Digital Kingdom Of Fear.
Sign here,
This is dF