# Is this an unethical way of making money online?



## Erudis (Jan 23, 2011)

Aßbiscuits said:


> So for absolutely no work, I just made $75.


I have yet to meet a web designer, writer or any freelancer or company working in a similar field that was able to hit the nail on the head in the first try. So, unless you're simply getting the money and giving the client's direct contact info to whoever is doing the job, you may forget the "absolutely no work" part.

You'll be handling all the communication, including approving/disapproving corrections, dealing with angry clients, demanding payment, going to project meetings and explaining why you did a certain thing in a certain way.

And don't fool yourself thinking that, by choosing only the smaller jobs, you won't have to deal with all of this, because the small clients are the ones that give you the most trouble. I can say this by experience.

But, if you did manage to make it work without having to work at all, then good for you.


----------



## wiarumas (Aug 27, 2010)

kudi said:


> Well its good on paper. However you do run the risk of lots of legwork if the customer is very picky or the designer is slow to respond or very opinionated. So if you don't like with dealing with people problems, escape while you can. Success can be a problem to, if you start making decent money "big brother" is gonna want his slice of the pie.
> 
> I do think lying isn't a good option especially if you have designers that you use repeatedly, they'll know something is amiss or if your customer decides to post on craigslist or whatever places you decided to post as well and discovers the scheme. Just one of those comments on your profile can destroy your credibility, no one likes feeling doped even if they get a nice result. If you decide to use that strategy be very careful.


I was thinking more along the lines that she is 100% liable as there is no corporation entity set up for her legal protection - she is the sole proprieter and would have to delcare all gains and losses on her personal income tax. Lets say something goes really wrong and the developer doesn't deliver what the customer has agreed to purchase, they could go after her personally and sue her directly, take her car, house, etc. If she set it up as a legitimate business, she would be financially safe from lawsuits but then would have to pay twice in taxes - once for the corporation and once for her pay.


----------



## kudi (Sep 27, 2011)

> I was thinking more along the lines that she is 100% liable as there is no corporation entity set up for her legal protection - she is the sole proprieter and would have to delcare all gains and losses on her personal income tax. Lets say something goes really wrong and the developer doesn't deliver what the customer has agreed to purchase, they could go after her personally and sue her directly, take her car, house, etc. If she set it up as a legitimate business, she would be financially safe from lawsuits but then would have to pay twice in taxes - once for the corporation and once for her pay.


I'm no lawyer, so if you are one then I'll yield to your wisdom. But while forming a legal entity to protect your asset is good, this business itself is very low risk and involves very small sums of cash, which it that case it isn't a big deal. I think the risk of someone suing you for non-critical work like web design is negligible. Its cheaper to just hire another web-designer then to hire a lawyer. At most they'll probably settle out of court for a full refund.


----------



## wiarumas (Aug 27, 2010)

kudi said:


> I'm no lawyer, so if you are one then I'll yield to your wisdom. But while forming a legal entity to protect your asset is good, this business itself is very low risk and involves very small sums of cash, which it that case it isn't a big deal. I think the risk of someone suing you for non-critical work like web design is negligible. Its cheaper to just hire another web-designer then to hire a lawyer. At most they'll probably settle out of court for a full refund.


Not a lawyer but in a somewhat related field to web design. Like @Erudis said, plenty of picky clients out there who will make your life a living hell if you don't make exactly what they want. Add in the fact that she is subcontracting work, she would have to worry about liabilties on both sides.

Client pays $1500 for site. She pays subcontracted web designer $1400 to make it. Collects $100 comission. Client isn't happy. Goes after her for full $1500. She wants $1400 back from web designer. Web designer says no. Etc.


----------



## Larxene (Nov 24, 2011)

So basically you're being an implicit middleman, marketing other people's free-lancing efforts.

Whether it is ethical or not depends on which form of ethics you follow. If you follow virtue ethics, which says that being virtuous is moral, then since you are in fact deceiving others by not telling them where their work is getting sold to and how much they could've gotten if they knew where to find employment, you are not practicing the virtue of honesty. Therefore, you are unethical.

I personally prefer consequentialist ethics. It is more practical. Let's look at the consequences. Your freelancers' uncopyrighted work will be credited to you. If you then copyright these work to yourself, THEY would commit copyright infringement if they presented those work as their own. This is a negative consequence, of course. But then there's an additional consequence. These people who've been tricked into releasing uncopyrighted work will realize the importance of copyrighting their work, and will make sure they copyright them in the future.

If you do not copyright their work as your own, then they get to re-use them. No negative consequences.

Then there's the financial issue. Well, the transaction benefited both you and them. True, they got less pay, but you can also say that it is their fault for not being able to find work directly, so you have actually helped them to at least get some work and compensation. I think 50% in such situations isn't a bad deal.

Overall I think the consequences are more good than bad. Therefore, I'd say that from a consequentialist point of view, it is ethical.


----------

