Does the bar get lower as you get further into a piece? If so, is there a point somewhere around the halfway point where your need to “like it or else” goes way back up? I always want to know what keeps ‘em reading.

In a word, no. If anything, the “need to like it or else” as you call it goes down the further into the piece I go. Line 15 should be every bit as engaging as Line 1, but if you haven’t got my attention by Line 1 then I’ll never get to Line 15. I employ the same critical process when I read blogs online – whether they be poetry blogs, marketing blogs, or any other content. If you lose my interest, sorry, I’m gone. I don’t have time to waste. That said, I do have different expectations as a reader than I do as an editor, but the critical process is always turned on.

On your final paragraph:

I do think that though there should not be a substantive difference in what is legal online vs in print, some very direct and specific language would help “borrowers” understand that fact.

I think, substantively, the legal obligations are still the same for content creators. What is different is methodology. It is impractical, and often cumbersome for readers, for online content creators to include for every external reference a complete stylized reference (Elizabeth Able, Ablereach, “Mom Remodels WordPress”, April 25, 2008, http://ablereach.com/wordpress/mom-remodels-wordpress/).

Just imagine how cumbersome that would be for readers every time I quote a new source (particularly if I do my homework and quote a lot of sources in one post). It is much more practical, fair to the source, and provides creative license for an online content producer to simply link to the source (i.e. specific page from which content is used) with a simple link that serves as reasonable attribution. You can’t do that in print, but you can do that online. Now, if I was writing an e-book instead of a blog post then I might both link to the source and provide a detailed bibliography depending on my audience and purpose of the content. An academic paper, of course, would require a reference appropriate for the manual of style being used. There’s got to be some level of intelligent thought process involved that is fair to the source, your readers, and yourself.

3. Read the third line; if I like it, keep reading.
4. And so on ad nauseam until I finished all of the poems

Does the bar get lower as you get further into a piece? If so, is there a point somewhere around the halfway point where your need to “like it or else” goes way back up? I always want to know what keeps ‘em reading.

I agree 100% that a “protected by copyright” notice should not get top billing. Prominent fear of being coveted unjustly isn’t exactly a great selling point, and it’s not a good creative incentive either. IMHO, swirling vortex of time suckage is the natural state of fear related enforcement.

I think sites and authors with a flashy copyright notice look insecure and immature. If you’re still reading (this comment) at this point is more to the point, unless the piece in question is the site’s copyright notice. Especially in the case of submissions to a potential publisher, one would hope that the author already felt good about the publisher, and the publisher’s re-print/re-use policy.

I do think that though there should not be a substantive difference in what is legal online vs in print, some very direct and specific language would help “borrowers” understand that fact.

It is highly unlikely that Congress will act quickly with regard to orphaned works, but it is equally unlikely that they will adopt anything as disastrously silly as what you are afraid of.

I’ve had articles stolen so I understand how annoying it can be to have to chase down the perpetrator and send out C&D letters, etc. I spent more time trying to achieve justice than the thieves likely made on the content. I reasoned that it just wasn’t worth it in the long run. I know that when I search for my articles by keyword then they are indexed in the search engines and not the websites that scraped them. I’ve learned that I can make better use of my time by creating new content than by worrying over how last year’s blog posts are being used today, and there are folks who will put that Copyscape icon right at the top of their blogs as if that is the most important concern in the world. I’m just saying that it isn’t.

Jim, I think you do a good job of giving attribution, from what I’ve seen. It is difficult to do all the research and make sure you quote everybody correctly. Writing Internet content is not a Master’s thesis. My view of blogging is that this medium is a marketing tool. That’s what I think its best use is. If you look at how companies do marketing – both online and off line – you’ll notice that it is difficult sometimes to measure ROI. Whether you write fiction, poetry, or something else, you are still engaged in marketing and producing a product. The same principles apply for this business as for any other. If you use the tools for what they are capable of and don’t expect more of them than they are capable of producing then you won’t be disappointed. You don’t have to make money on a blog for it to be beneficial to your business. For a writer, gaining a loyal audience is about the best benefit you can get.