Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Craigslist Suing Padmapper

gigaom.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 465 posts

Re: Craigslist Suing Padmapper

#371

Post by res0nat0r »

learc83 wrote: post #360
res0nat0r wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The users never agreed to their data being displayed on any other sites besides CL. If they wanted that to happen they would personally place their listings on other websites, or sign up for some type of 'post your classified add to 100s of sites from us' service, which CL clearly is not.

That doesn't necessarily mean that Craigslist has standing to sue on it's users behalf however. Also most of those listings don't merit copyright protection, because they are statements of fact not creative works.

The user owns the post and grants CL the right to display it, and the TOS also grants CL the right to prevent others from displaying it without CL's permission.

Re: Craigslist Suing Padmapper

#372

Post by robotsgz »

pg wrote: post #210

Craig Newmark said on Quora that the reason they didn't like people building stuff on top of Craigslist was simply the extra bandwidth they consumed: http://www.quora.com/Why-hasnt-anyone-built-any-products-on-... But now that 3Taps has found an ingenious way to get at the data with zero extra bandwidth cost to Craigslist (by retrieving it from the Google cache rather than CL itself), it's clear that what Craigslist…

Not sure I would call that ingenious. But your point is sorely need of being made more often.

How many other websites use arguments like "bandwidth" to falsely portray competitors who access their publicly shared data as somehow in the wrong?

Many. Some here on HN. No need to name names.

No doubt even Google would complain about people "scraping" search results.

To me, it is a joke. Because the people who complain use automation to access, retrieve, organise and serve information and thereby establish their business. Only then to try to forbid others from using automation to do the same.

And all the while, it's NOT THEIR INFORMATION. This is not Craigslist's data. It's users' data.

It belongs to users, who are today's "publishers" and possess all those good ole publisher's rights. (Though they may naively license them out.)

Re: Craigslist Suing Padmapper

#373

Post by danielweber »

cwp wrote: post #369
danielweber wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there is a significant difference between copying data, and just giving pointers to CL's data. However, If I blogged that I was renting my apartment and linked to the Craigslist post describing it, I would be doing exactly what Padmapper is doing. This doesn't line up in a few ways. Padmapper is a third-party, not the original poster. There is also a distinction between doing it as a one-off and doing it in a…

If linking without permission is problematic, Hacker News is in real trouble. So is just about every blog and news site on the web.

Right. I've already agreed that there is a significant difference between displaying copies of CL listings and just having pointers to them.

It doesn't seem, however, that the link is the crux of CL's complaint. Rather it's the fact that PM has copied CL's data in order to generate a mapping of physical locations to CL listings.

Re: Craigslist Suing Padmapper

#374

Post by learc83 »

res0nat0r wrote: post #371
learc83 wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't necessarily mean that Craigslist has standing to sue on it's users behalf however. Also most of those listings don't merit copyright protection, because they are statements of fact not creative works.

The user owns the post and grants CL the right to display it, and the TOS also grants CL the right to prevent others from displaying it without CL's permission.

If the user isn't posting a creative work just a statement of fact, it doesn't what the user says--it's not protected by copyright.

>the TOS also grants CL the right to prevent others from displaying it without CL's permission.

Just because the ToS says it doesn't mean it will work. Recently a judge said that a copyright troll called Rightshaven didn't have standing to sue on behalf of copyright holders for works that they licensed.

Re: Craigslist Suing Padmapper

#375

Post by stcredzero »

ceejayoz wrote: post #304
stcredzero wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's also no constitutional right to uninstalling a browser and installing your own browser. That doesn't mean something isn't going wrong with the public's interests. When a group can interfere with how you hunt for a place to live something is up. Where you live is pretty fundamental.

> When a group can interfere with how you hunt for a place to live something is up. What entitled bullshit. People/companies do that all the time. Padmapper could've run out of money and shut themselves down - would you pursue a court injunction on the basis that they shouldn't be able to interfere with how you hunt for an apartment? How about if they changed the UI in a way you didn't like?

> What entitled bullshit.

Wanting the market to work isn't entitled BS. It's good civic thinking. Craigslist holding onto its incumbency, counter to the interests of the public is entitled BS.

> Padmapper could've run out of money and shut themselves down - would you pursue a court injunction on the basis that they shouldn't be able to interfere with how you hunt for an apartment? How about if they changed the UI in a way you didn't like?

The first would've been the market working as it should. Also, if Padmapper messes up its UI and goes out of business, then the market works as it should.

Craigslist holding onto its monopoly position is a broken market.

Re: Craigslist Suing Padmapper

#376

Post by stcredzero »

ceejayoz wrote: post #272
stcredzero wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is obvious that smaller sites like PadMapper want to slowly try and chip away at Craiglist content It's not Craigslist's content. It's our content, the general public's. Craigslist is just a caretaker. Right now, it's a caretaker acting in its own interests against the public's.

The general public gave it to Craigslist under readily available terms. The general public is free to also give it to your service, but that's up to them.

This is disingenuous. Craigslist isn't doing the public's will. It's just taking advantage of public apathy. (Much like Microsoft did with the browser wars.)

Re: Craigslist Suing Padmapper

#377

Post by stcredzero »

res0nat0r wrote: post #273
stcredzero wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is obvious that smaller sites like PadMapper want to slowly try and chip away at Craiglist content It's not Craigslist's content. It's our content, the general public's. Craigslist is just a caretaker. Right now, it's a caretaker acting in its own interests against the public's.

Yes you did post some facts about your listing to CL, it is also well within Craigslists right to allow others to copy it or not. Just because you supplied the data to CL doesn't mean you can dictate to them how they should run their business.

A copyright clause designed to allow Craigslist to stop abuse shouldn't be used to squash competitors. That's not dictating "how they should run their business." That's telling them to stop being selfish.

Re: Craigslist Suing Padmapper

#378

Post by stcredzero »

Kadrith wrote: post #346
stcredzero wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is obvious that smaller sites like PadMapper want to slowly try and chip away at Craiglist content It's not Craigslist's content. It's our content, the general public's. Craigslist is just a caretaker. Right now, it's a caretaker acting in its own interests against the public's.

It also does not mean that CL has any obligation to provide that data to another for free. If you want the data in multiple locations, post it to those other locations.

The purpose of CL is to provide data for free. Why should they care how that data is packaged, so long as this packaging is not abusive, but actually beneficial?

The real reason: Craigslist wants to hold onto their monopoly position.

Re: Craigslist Suing Padmapper

#379

Post by ChuckMcM »

learc83 wrote: post #359
ChuckMcM wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hear you, but I don't know if the courts will agree with your interpretation. The reason for that is that the courts will look at the consequence of having that interpretation widely accepted and the impact on the current state of affairs. There are many many places where this has been litigated and the courts always come down on the side of the data aggregator owning rights to the data aggregated. If PadMapper wan…

>If they can prove that the listing owner asked them to list their property, Craigslist can't sue. Look at the Rightshaven case. The judge ruled that Rightshaven didn't have standing to sue on behalf just because the copyright holder granted it license to. If that theory holds up, Craigslist wouldn't have standing to sue on behalf of the copyright holders. Additionally copyright would only apply if the listings are c…

As others have pointed out Craigslist can claim copyright to the collection. The legal theory I would expect them to use is that PadMapper wouldn't know about these listings if they didn't access Craigslist's collection, therefore their use of the collection violated Craigslist's copyright.

I did a quick Blekko for the case with the Yellow Pages that was litigated this way (but alas did not find it) where a AT&T sued the maker of a competitive Yellow Pages over using the collection of businesses in their book. The defendant argument was similar to yours, that they could have walked down the street and collected the information so the information wasn't copyrightable, but the judge ruled in favor of AT&T because it was clear the defendant could have done that but they didn't do that. There was some errors and omissions that mirrored the Yellow pages and 'proved' the defendant took their data from the Yellow Pages rather than collect it themselves.

For PadMapper to escape liability they have to be able to prove they came to know about these listings in some other way than through Craigslist's collection of them. They argued in their blog that 3Taps did that for them because they got them from 3Taps they aren't liable for what ever 3Taps is doing. And my take on it is that given the case law it will be a very hard thing to prove. If Eric Goldman is reading he could probably whip out a definitive argument here.

If it goes to trial I'll definitely follow the case to see how it plays out.

Re: Craigslist Suing Padmapper

#380

Post by res0nat0r »

learc83 wrote: post #374
res0nat0r wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The user owns the post and grants CL the right to display it, and the TOS also grants CL the right to prevent others from displaying it without CL's permission.

If the user isn't posting a creative work just a statement of fact, it doesn't what the user says--it's not protected by copyright. >the TOS also grants CL the right to prevent others from displaying it without CL's permission. Just because the ToS says it doesn't mean it will work. Recently a judge said that a copyright troll called Rightshaven didn't have standing to sue on behalf of copyright holders for works tha…

Assemblages of fact are protected by copyright tpateck has commented in the previous threads on Padmapper about this. This is why a Farmers Almanac is under copyright and I cannot wholesale copy a phonebook or Encyclopedia Britannica without infringing their rights.

Regarding Righthaven, the original media company never gave Righthaven control of the copyright of their data, just the right to sue. This is why it was struck down.

As for Righthaven's lack of standing to sue over Review-Journal content, Hunt wrote the recently unsealed lawsuit contract between Righthaven and Stephens Media -- called the Strategic Alliance Agreement (SAA) -- clearly leaves Stephens Media in control of the copyrights and gives Righthaven only the right to sue.

In order to file lawsuits, copyright plaintiffs have to have actual control of the copyrights, not just the right to sue, Hunt found.

http://www.vegasinc.com/news/2011/jun/14/judge-rules-rightha...

Post reply on HN