Items in this category will display on the homepage
“Any access to or use of craigslist to design, develop, test, update, operate, modify, maintain, support, market, advertise, distribute or otherwise make available any program, application or service (including, without limitation, any device, technology, product, computer program, mobile device application, website, or mechanical or personal service) that enables or provides access to, use of, operation of or interoperation with craigslist (including, without limitation, to access content, post content, cross-post content, re-post content, respond or reply to content, verify content, transmit content, create accounts, verify accounts, use accounts, circumvent and/or automate technological security measures or restrictions, or flag content) is prohibited. This prohibition specifically applies but is not limited to software, programs, applications and services for use or operation on or by any computer and/or any electronic, wireless and/or mobile device, technology or product that exists now or in the future.”
I have to remind myself that this is ‘Craigslist’ that ‘hippiesque’ community postings hub. BUT reading this I am reminded that it is a corporation and compared to PadMapper and 3Taps it is an ’800 pound gorilla.’ Nothing demonstrates that better than this language quoted above from their TOS and their lawsuit. How can they not see how these terms are in direct conflict with the desires of their huge community of users. Put simply, the legal posture misses the forrest for the trees. The community (Craigslist CUSTOMERS) get this, Molly McHugh of Digital Trends writes:
All that said, putting sites like PadMapper out to pasture is incredibly, incredibly anti-consumer. And it means that Craiglist has two choices: Either allow the likes of PadMapper to exist, or massively update your platform. I’m in favor of the former — slap a licensing fee on interested parties for all I care, and those that are truly getting traffic thanks to the database that Craigslist has created will pony up the cash. Sure, you’re feeding your competition in that scenario, but unless you’re willing to redesign your site for a pleasant and successful user experience then you may as well demote yourself from consumer-facing application to platform.
As something of a short term (but maybe long term) solution, PadMapper is promoting its own service, PadLister, where you can list a home for free on the site. The entire debacle is getting so much hype that PadLister’s name is rising. Considering the angry mob ready to charge with virtual pitchforks, this could easily have a negative effect on Craigslist.
It sounds childish to say this, but you’re being plain mean to users, Craigslist. Your site is chock-full of data I need, but your interface is an exercise in torture. Either give me the tools to effectively use your site or allow someone else to do it.
Craigslist is fundamentally about community, it’s success is because of community support and now it is biting the hand that feeds it . In the wake of this news and community uproar, I wondered if Craigslist would respond to their community, attempt to mitigate this community relations disaster. Perhaps engaging with them to address complaints about the outdated platform.
Given the community uproar Craigslist’s lawyers ought to be urging their executives to ‘make love not war!’ Not so. Yesterday, Craigslist ‘upped the ante’ by sneaking the following exclusive license clause in Craigslist posts:
Clicking “Continue” confirms that craigslist is the exclusive licensee of this content, with the exclusive right to enforce copyrights against anyone copying, republishing, distributing or preparing derivative works without its consent.
In his blog post, Jonathan Berger writes:
I don’t remember seeing this before at the bottom of the Craigslist posting form. I’m guessing this is the result of the Padmapper debacle?
Claiming an exclusive license over user content is, until yesterday, unheard of and, in this case, it is just dumb. Moreover, sneaking in terms, after the fact, is plain wrong. By doing this, Craigslist made it clear that they have officially moved to the dark side.
From a legal perspective claiming ownership (exclusive license) of the content copyright would make sense if there was a copyright to claim. You can’t copyright facts so in a classified ad perhaps the only ‘copyrightable’ content is the descriptive wording of the ad . The ‘substance’ such as price, rooms, location (in the case of rental listings) is not subject to copyright. Put simply, dumb move all the way around! Timothy Lee of Ars Technica wrote an excellent analysis which concludes with the following insight:
“Craigslist fails to recognize that its users gain value by having their advertisements widely distributed and searchable. Instead of working to benefit its users by developing new, innovative features itself or encouraging third-party developers to do the same, Craigslist believes it can retain its strength in the market simply by clinging to its user’s content in a Gollum-like fashion.”
By standing with the interests of their community, Craigslist could benefit on the business side, too. As it stands, they are giving up a tremendous opportunity for additional revenue. As a user of Craiglists’ free service I would gladly pay a small fee to have my listing distributed more widely on other networks. Craigslist could have additional revenue from it’s users and additional revenue from partnering agreements with other networks by becoming a data broker on behalf of their listing users.
I know that this situation will likely be discussed at business schools and maybe it will even be written up as a business case study, in the future. Depending on the outcome of the litigation, the litigation claims may be discussed in law schools. It is unlikely that the discussion at the business school will be anything like the one at the law school. Unfortunately, both will miss the point, that in their zeal to win they are really losing.