Here we'll explore the nexus of legal rulings, Capitol Hill
policy-making, technical standards development, and technological
innovation that creates -- and will recreate -- the networked world as we
know it. Among the topics we'll touch on: intellectual property
conflicts, technical architecture and innovation, the evolution of
copyright, private vs. public interests in Net policy-making, lobbying
and the law, and more.
Disclaimer: the opinions expressed in this weblog are those of the authors and not of their respective institutions.
Nick Bilton blogs for the NY Times about Craigslist. It's generally a familiar story: the old established business protects itself by legal threats, unexpected API changes, and generally working to lock out competitors and innovators who want to build on and improve the basic service.
The difference here is that we're not talking about the typical Big Cartel Corporation; instead, this is Craigslist. Many of us have mental images of Craigslist as being small, local, homey. In fact that's how it started, but in the intervening years it has grown into a multi-million dollar business. Once in a while it hits the news, as happened when it was forced to shutter its adult services sections after charges arose that the ads there were thinly veiled covers for prostitution and human trafficking.
But despite these blips, the service has generally retained a genial and positive public image. Bilton argues that part of why Craigslist - which has generally grown old, creaky, and ripe for disruption - hasn't been surpassed is the large surplus of goodwill and beneficent image it maintains. People, even those whose attempts at building new services on Craigslist have been shuttered, don't seem willing to make a big deal of it nor attack the service publicly.
This can only go on so long before people notice and start losing their goodwill - remember when everyone thought Google really wasn't evil? As Fred said, Craigslist (which didn't comment for this story) is in the wrong here and needs to live up to its reputation, not down to its legal bottom line.
I'm not terribly sure of what you're saying here. I read the original article. Are you saying that Craigslist will get what's coming to them?
Why is Craigslist in the wrong? I mean, I understand the stifling of innovation and all that...but in fairness, it's their prerogative to do so...Did the programmer who made the map application ask for permission? If he did and he was flatly denied, then his plight garners a little more sympathy; but if he didn't even bother trying to collaborate or clear rights, I'm afraid I don't feel that badly for him.
People are quick to criticize this perspective. I often find, however, that those who do tend to be unclear or plain ignorant with regards to intellectual property rights. It's a matter of maintaining a system. In this instance, the map application doesn't harm Craigslist in any way...but the law is in place to make sure that more harmful abuses don't happen.
All this means is that the programmer must ask for permission before using someone else's IP.
I tend to be someone who leans towards the left on copyright issues. While I'm not a copyright abolitionist, I certainly think that the current law is flawed. That said, I don't think that what the programmer did should qualify as a fair use/dealing.
2. Alan Wexelblat on August 1, 2012 11:42 AM writes...
"What's coming to them" sounds ominous. As the article points out, the Craigslist service is old and creaky, lacking in many features users would like, and with a very 1990s UI. Generally, businesses that don't modernize and add features that customers want get replaced by businesses (or sites) that do.
If Craigslist is wrong (what I said was "in the wrong" meaning slightly different) it's in that there's a contrast between it's genial homey image and its actual actions.
1. James Plotkin on July 31, 2012 12:52 PM writes...
I'm not terribly sure of what you're saying here. I read the original article. Are you saying that Craigslist will get what's coming to them?
Why is Craigslist in the wrong? I mean, I understand the stifling of innovation and all that...but in fairness, it's their prerogative to do so...Did the programmer who made the map application ask for permission? If he did and he was flatly denied, then his plight garners a little more sympathy; but if he didn't even bother trying to collaborate or clear rights, I'm afraid I don't feel that badly for him.
People are quick to criticize this perspective. I often find, however, that those who do tend to be unclear or plain ignorant with regards to intellectual property rights. It's a matter of maintaining a system. In this instance, the map application doesn't harm Craigslist in any way...but the law is in place to make sure that more harmful abuses don't happen.
All this means is that the programmer must ask for permission before using someone else's IP.
I tend to be someone who leans towards the left on copyright issues. While I'm not a copyright abolitionist, I certainly think that the current law is flawed. That said, I don't think that what the programmer did should qualify as a fair use/dealing.
Permalink to Comment2. Alan Wexelblat on August 1, 2012 11:42 AM writes...
"What's coming to them" sounds ominous. As the article points out, the Craigslist service is old and creaky, lacking in many features users would like, and with a very 1990s UI. Generally, businesses that don't modernize and add features that customers want get replaced by businesses (or sites) that do.
If Craigslist is wrong (what I said was "in the wrong" meaning slightly different) it's in that there's a contrast between it's genial homey image and its actual actions.
Permalink to Comment