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

An Open Letter to Craig Newmark

krrb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 109 posts

Re: An Open Letter to Craig Newmark

#31

Post by [deleted] »

tempestn wrote: post #26
throwaway9848 wrote: post #20

Craigslist has been incredibly consistent about its position. It would be shocking of Krrb didn't get a C&D. The author's mock surprise and petty insults come off really pathetic given this is clearly a planned publicity stunt. CL is simple, unobtrusive, and doesn't make its users feel like it's try to monetize every click or pageview. That's why the dominate the market. I love it that they sue the hell out of anyone…

No, it's that craigslist has massive network effects working for them, so there's no incentive for buyers or sellers to use a different site, even with a better interface and feature set. 3taps is alleging that this monopoly position, combined with craigslist's legal and technical efforts to block any innovation that makes use of data posted on craigslist, constitutes anti-competitive behavior. Whether that assertion…

[deleted]

Re: An Open Letter to Craig Newmark

#32

Post by cecilpl »

res0nat0r wrote: post #17
jmduke wrote: post #3

It's important to note that this is, at first glance, a different beast than the padmappers/3Taps issues, which were primarily about scraping craigslist data and placing it on a different site. Krrb has users press a button, which scrapes a given post. The end result is the same -- the same data as Craigslist being displayed on a different site -- but this is coming from the Krrb users' own volitions, which I think m…

I think this is the same issue as Padmapper, just on a much smaller scale. Don't write code that will re-display/re-post content of a Craigslist post on your 3rd party website. I bet if the button were changed to just cut/paste an html link to .craigslist.org/post all would be well. This is just CL trying to keep their postings exclusive to their website of which they've spent many a time and money trying to build an…

Making the user press a button then manually copy/paste the url is okay.

Making the user press a button then automatically copy/paste the url is bad.

Got it.

Re: An Open Letter to Craig Newmark

#34

Post by res0nat0r »

cecilpl wrote: post #32
res0nat0r wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is the same issue as Padmapper, just on a much smaller scale. Don't write code that will re-display/re-post content of a Craigslist post on your 3rd party website. I bet if the button were changed to just cut/paste an html link to .craigslist.org/post all would be well. This is just CL trying to keep their postings exclusive to their website of which they've spent many a time and money trying to build an…

Making the user press a button then manually copy/paste the url is okay. Making the user press a button then automatically copy/paste the url is bad. Got it.

Actually:

Cutting / pasting content from CL: bad.

Cutting / pasting a post URL from CL: good.

Re: An Open Letter to Craig Newmark

#35

Post by x0x0 »

richardjordan wrote: post #16

This is a pointless waste if time. The guy has made shed loads of money and his actions have clearly demonstrated he doesn't give a flying whatever about anyone's opinion of his actions and will continue to do whatever maximizes his profit. I say that without positive or negative judgment. It just is what it is. The whole - hey we know you're really a nice kid so stop bullying the other kids - schtick never worked in…

craigslist is far from profit maximizing. That's part of why craigslist's users tend to love it.

Re: An Open Letter to Craig Newmark

#36

Post by [deleted] »

colinsidoti wrote: post #27
tempestn wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it increase the chances that they would sue? Yes, it does. Does it increase the chances that they'd win? Perhaps not, if your arguments hold. Does that matter? No, because you're still talking about stealth distribution of a program that tracks and republishes user data without their knowledge or permission! (And no, a notice buried in the TOU doesn't count.) Edit to reply to below: Ah, ok. Your phrasing of "pig…

What if we put a little checkbox that says "Install the krrb plugin to automatically post your craigslist listings on krrb as well, thus increasing your chances at a sale." I'm defining "piggyback downloads" as the extra page that comes up in someones installer. Isn't this a well-established practice? Maybe it's disappeared in the past few years? I also love seeing this argument come within a community that's general…

[deleted]

Re: An Open Letter to Craig Newmark

#37

Post by jamespo »

samstave wrote: post #25
res0nat0r wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Smart businessmen (who want to stay in business) don't blog about litigious information, no matter how cool or web 2.0 it is to do so now days. They let their lawyers handle it.

uh.... there is NOTHING web 2.0 about CL

well it's profitable... actually you're right

Re: An Open Letter to Craig Newmark

#38

Post by ghshephard »

They certainly get marks for consistency. I'm willing to bet that 90+% of the regular HN audience would have been able to predict precisely what CL would do in the face of scraping (and yes, that's what the krrb button does) CL content.

It's someone ironic in the face of Marco's post regarding the open web, that CL maintains such a moat around their content through litigation/legal threats.

Don't get me wrong - I absolutely understand why CL does it, and I'm sure most of the business savvy people here realize it's a profit-maximizing strategy given CL's current market position.

But - it might be just a local maxima.

I wonder, if given a different approach, CL might be able to build something more open and visionary; a platform that other developers can build on top of, instead of being prevented from doing anything innovative by CL and their legal team?

Re: An Open Letter to Craig Newmark

#39

Post by bsaul »

ghshephard wrote: post #38

They certainly get marks for consistency. I'm willing to bet that 90+% of the regular HN audience would have been able to predict precisely what CL would do in the face of scraping (and yes, that's what the krrb button does) CL content. It's someone ironic in the face of Marco's post regarding the open web, that CL maintains such a moat around their content through litigation/legal threats. Don't get me wrong - I abs…

i'm also willing to bet that not a single CL user would understand why CL claims ownership on their ad content, when the user themselves are the ones publishing it elsewhere.

on a sidenote, the fact that the legal system makes it so expensive to defend themselves that they prefer to just obey really means the rich always get justice on their side. it's a really big issue. i wonder why there isn't any start up that tries to address it.

Re: An Open Letter to Craig Newmark

#40

Post by bsaul »

aneth4 wrote: post #12

The worst part is the hypocracy... what Buckmaster claims about himself: "Possibly the only CEO ever described as anti-establishment, a communist, and a socialistic anarchist" http://www.craigslist.org/about/jim_buckmaster

i've often noticed that many people claiming to be communist simply have an unhealthy love/hate relationship with money.
Post reply on HN