4 ms·

It's pretty clear that Padmapper is making use of the craigslist posts without the rights to do so, which is defined by Merriam-Webster as "stealing". STEALI

by chimi 14y ago

It's pretty clear that Padmapper is making use of the craigslist posts without the rights to do so, which is defined by Merriam-Webster as "stealing". STEALING transitive verb 1a : to take or appropriate without right or leave and with intent to keep or make use of wrongfully http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/stealing http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/stealing If you're going to downvote me, that's fine, but if you do, please show how copyright infringement does not fit within the definition of stealing. I'd like to settle this semantic debate once and for all.

gcb 14y ago
nice. you just proved that they are stealing by stealing from Merriam-Webster! or are you going to say it's fair use? i for one advertised places in craigslist and search for places on padmapper. I loved that my listing showed up for free and without me moving a finger on padmapper, and i found it much bette to find a place using padmapper's interface. now, posting on craigslist has lost value for me. as my post will not be on that nice interface for people to find. So, as far as you may prove they are stealing craigslist data, they sure as hell are not 'stealing' my data that i post at craigslist. So, i don't think it fits the last word of your stolen definition "make use of wrongfully".
gpcz 14y ago
Are you referring to stealing in terms of ethics, or theft in terms of the legal system? Ethics are subjective, so I don't really want to go down that road. In terms of US law, however, the Supreme Court case Dowling v. United States found that "interference with copyright does not easily equate with theft, conversion, or fraud." (src: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_infringement#Theft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_infringement#Theft )
cwp 14y ago
Padmapper doesn't infringe copyrights either. edit: Ok, I won't be so cryptic. Padmapper doesn't copy the posts on Craigslist, they link to them. That's not a semantic quibble. All search engines do so. 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.
- danielweber 14y ago
  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 an automated fashion. Padmapper needs to make it trivial for people to "upload" their listings from CL to PM. It could be a single bookmarklet. Now, suppose that Alice tells Padmapper about Bob's apartment for rent on CL. That's getting even weirder, but PM might be okay if they follow DMCA safe harbour procedures.
  - cwp 14y ago
    If linking without permission is problematic, Hacker News is in real trouble. So is just about every blog and news site on the web.
    - danielweber 14y ago
      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.
      - cwp 14y ago
        You can't copyright data, only its expression. That a certain apartment is available for rent is a fact. The text that appears on the CL website is one expression of that fact. The map that appears on Padmapper is another expression of the same fact.
kytmizuno 14y ago
Does craigslist actually own the copyrights to user generate text and images?
- coliveira 14y ago
  Of course. From their TOS: "You automatically grant and assign to CL, and you represent and warrant that you have the right to grant and assign to CL, a perpetual, irrevocable, unlimited, fully paid, fully sub-licensable (through multiple tiers), worldwide license to copy, perform, display, distribute, prepare derivative works from (including, without limitation, incorporating into other works) and otherwise use any content that you post."
  - arkem 14y ago
    Having a broad license is not the same as owning the copyright (especially a non-exclusive license).
  - Flimm 14y ago
    That just means that the users of Craiglist grant them an unlimited license. The users still own the copyright, though.
    - runako 14y ago
      Where does Padmapper's license to the listing data originate? When do the posters of listings grant Padmapper a license of any kind?
      - cwp 14y ago
        You don't need a license to link to something.
        runako 14y ago
        The listing data that is presented and rendered on Padmapper's site isn't linked (e.g. the price & # of bedrooms). That is, I don't have to click a link to go to the original site to view the content. Padmapper does link to images, but Padmapper would be useless if it didn't also re-publish the content jacked from Craigslist.
argv_empty 14y ago
"Find which dictionary phrases it the way I like" is a pretty silly game, especially when they're so vague about the definitions they use anyway.
MichaelGG 14y ago
Because it's copyright infringement, that's what it is, no one disagrees on that. Using "steal" tries to load copyright violations with a specific meaning, and that is not agreed on. It frames the debate, and people take issue with that as it creates a more emotional and less objective discussion. Also: http://lesswrong.com/lw/nz/arguing_by_definition/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/nz/arguing_by_definition/
- cwp 14y ago
  Nope, not copyright infringement either.
potatolicious 14y ago
There ought to be a rule that when someone reaches for the dictionary in a debate they've already lost. I keep seeing this on HN - a dictionary is probably the worst place go find out about what a word really means.
- chimi 14y ago
  I hear people say "They stole my idea!" or if they hear a familiar melody, "They stole that from The Doors!" So the dictionary agrees with the common use of steal in the realm of intellectual property. It's really the proponents of copyright violation who have redefined stealing to exclude copyrighted digital media.
- danielweber 14y ago
  Maybe, if we get a rule that people aren't allowed to say no, they didn't _steal_ your work, because you still have it.
  - potatolicious 14y ago
    It's all framing, I'd be happy if we stopped arguing over the word "steal" all the damned time instead of addressing the finer points of copyright and its role in our society. The people who will whip out dictionaries over "steal" are crudely trying to inject an emotional response into the debate and trying to override rational discourse with rhetoric. The people who are constantly whipping out "you still have it" are naively pretending that, just because it doesn't fit within all the criteria of physical theft, it also means that the other moral concerns associated with it are equally moot. tl;dr: Both sides of the "stealing!" debate are being incredibly disingenuous.

by chimi 14y ago

gcb 14y ago

nice. you just proved that they are stealing by stealing from Merriam-Webster! or are you going to say it's fair use? i for one advertised places in craigslist and search for places on padmapper. I loved that my listing showed up for free and without me moving a finger on padmapper, and i found it much bette to find a place using padmapper's interface. now, posting on craigslist has lost value for me. as my post will not be on that nice interface for people to find. So, as far as you may prove they are stealing craigslist data, they sure as hell are not 'stealing' my data that i post at craigslist. So, i don't think it fits the last word of your stolen definition "make use of wrongfully".

gpcz 14y ago

Are you referring to stealing in terms of ethics, or theft in terms of the legal system? Ethics are subjective, so I don't really want to go down that road. In terms of US law, however, the Supreme Court case Dowling v. United States found that "interference with copyright does not easily equate with theft, conversion, or fraud." (src: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_infringement#Theft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_infringement#Theft )

cwp 14y ago

Padmapper doesn't infringe copyrights either. edit: Ok, I won't be so cryptic. Padmapper doesn't copy the posts on Craigslist, they link to them. That's not a semantic quibble. All search engines do so. 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.

danielweber 14y ago
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 an automated fashion. Padmapper needs to make it trivial for people to "upload" their listings from CL to PM. It could be a single bookmarklet. Now, suppose that Alice tells Padmapper about Bob's apartment for rent on CL. That's getting even weirder, but PM might be okay if they follow DMCA safe harbour procedures.
- cwp 14y ago
  If linking without permission is problematic, Hacker News is in real trouble. So is just about every blog and news site on the web.
  - danielweber 14y ago
    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.
    - cwp 14y ago
      You can't copyright data, only its expression. That a certain apartment is available for rent is a fact. The text that appears on the CL website is one expression of that fact. The map that appears on Padmapper is another expression of the same fact.

kytmizuno 14y ago

Does craigslist actually own the copyrights to user generate text and images?

coliveira 14y ago
Of course. From their TOS: "You automatically grant and assign to CL, and you represent and warrant that you have the right to grant and assign to CL, a perpetual, irrevocable, unlimited, fully paid, fully sub-licensable (through multiple tiers), worldwide license to copy, perform, display, distribute, prepare derivative works from (including, without limitation, incorporating into other works) and otherwise use any content that you post."
- arkem 14y ago
  Having a broad license is not the same as owning the copyright (especially a non-exclusive license).
- Flimm 14y ago
  That just means that the users of Craiglist grant them an unlimited license. The users still own the copyright, though.
  - runako 14y ago
    Where does Padmapper's license to the listing data originate? When do the posters of listings grant Padmapper a license of any kind?
    - cwp 14y ago
      You don't need a license to link to something.
      - runako 14y ago
        The listing data that is presented and rendered on Padmapper's site isn't linked (e.g. the price & # of bedrooms). That is, I don't have to click a link to go to the original site to view the content. Padmapper does link to images, but Padmapper would be useless if it didn't also re-publish the content jacked from Craigslist.

argv_empty 14y ago

"Find which dictionary phrases it the way I like" is a pretty silly game, especially when they're so vague about the definitions they use anyway.

MichaelGG 14y ago

Because it's copyright infringement, that's what it is, no one disagrees on that. Using "steal" tries to load copyright violations with a specific meaning, and that is not agreed on. It frames the debate, and people take issue with that as it creates a more emotional and less objective discussion. Also: http://lesswrong.com/lw/nz/arguing_by_definition/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/nz/arguing_by_definition/

cwp 14y ago
Nope, not copyright infringement either.

potatolicious 14y ago

There ought to be a rule that when someone reaches for the dictionary in a debate they've already lost. I keep seeing this on HN - a dictionary is probably the worst place go find out about what a word really means.

chimi 14y ago
I hear people say "They stole my idea!" or if they hear a familiar melody, "They stole that from The Doors!" So the dictionary agrees with the common use of steal in the realm of intellectual property. It's really the proponents of copyright violation who have redefined stealing to exclude copyrighted digital media.
danielweber 14y ago
Maybe, if we get a rule that people aren't allowed to say no, they didn't _steal_ your work, because you still have it.
- potatolicious 14y ago
  It's all framing, I'd be happy if we stopped arguing over the word "steal" all the damned time instead of addressing the finer points of copyright and its role in our society. The people who will whip out dictionaries over "steal" are crudely trying to inject an emotional response into the debate and trying to override rational discourse with rhetoric. The people who are constantly whipping out "you still have it" are naively pretending that, just because it doesn't fit within all the criteria of physical theft, it also means that the other moral concerns associated with it are equally moot. tl;dr: Both sides of the "stealing!" debate are being incredibly disingenuous.