4 ms·

I kind of feel bad for Craigslist. Everyone is attacking them for wanting to hold onto their data. I don't think that they should be obligated to let just any

by agscala 14y ago

I kind of feel bad for Craigslist. Everyone is attacking them for wanting to hold onto their data. I don't think that they should be obligated to let just anyone scrape it

jonursenbach 14y ago
No, but there is clearly use cases for Craigslist having an API. Instead of suing everyone who wants to use their data to make beautiful products, they should be giving people legal ways of doing so.
- gamble 14y ago
  The problem for Craigslist is that the one thing people want is a better interface. If CL provides an API people can use to build an alternative frontend, and users start to go to these frontends instead of CL itself, there's nothing to stop those new frontends from extending CL with their own listings, and eventually extinguishing it. That was PadLister's business model.
  - iamwil 14y ago
    Padlister/Padmapper doesn't make money from from CL listings. Padlister charges money if listers listing directly on Padlister decides to use the online application.
- robterrell 14y ago
  Apparently they offered PadMapper paid access but PadMapper declined. Articles like this make PadMapper look even worse to me. And sloppy journalism. Why won't anyone ask PadMapper why they decided against? This is like half of a linkbait article. The fact that CL offered paid access was in last week's HN stories. I bet there's a breathless follow-up article with that fact, trolling for additional page views.
  - Mazy 14y ago
    Craigslist offered padmapper a license for using their data in mobile applications only. They gave him no options for padmapper.com
  - iamwil 14y ago
    Most users use padmapper through the website. CL offered a license only for mobile apps, which, depending on your point of view "a license with a crappy option, but a license nonetheless", or "a license that's completely not applicable".
aggronn 14y ago
But does that mean its okay for them to sue anyone who does? If they make the information public, how could they think they have a right to keep their data private from applications they think could be a competitive threat? Should Walmart sue Target if target scrapes walmart prices to help make decisions about their own online pricing schemes? In what way is it "their data" if they release it to the public? The law is pretty clear about this--facts can't be copyrighted. They don't own the facts. They don't own the bits that padmapper is referencing. All they own is the db records for the posts that originated the information. Imagine if they had a CL user meetup in public somewhere, and then they charged users to use a megaphone to announce that they were selling something. Someone writes down the information and has their own meetup for people who couldn't make it to the free, public CL meetup. Whats the difference between that and what padmapper is doing, except that padmapper is getting the information second hand? If CL thinks they have a right to their data, they should be suing google should they?
- smashing 14y ago
  "...they[Craigslist] charged users to use a megaphone to announce that they were selling something." I don't get where you came up with that. It wasn't in the article at all.
  - aggronn 14y ago
    I wasn't referencing the article.
- anamax 14y ago
  > The law is pretty clear about this--facts can't be copyrighted. While it is true that "facts can't be copyrighted", it's unclear that Craigslist listings qualify as facts in the relevant sense. (The singles listings, for example, surely don't.) > Someone writes down the information and has their own meetup for people who couldn't make it to the free, public CL meetup. Whats the difference between that and what padmapper is doing, except that padmapper is getting the information second hand? Getting the information second-hand seems fairly significant. Don't get me wrong - I think that craigslist should be disrupted, but I don't think that you should just do the easy parts. Note that the NYT has a dog in this fight - Craigslist has "disrupted" the newspaper biz.
jacoblyles 14y ago
I don't know about anyone else, but I'm attacking them for being an evil monopoly. If there were other viable services, I wouldn't care so much. They are the IE6 of classified ads. And just like IE6 they are holding back innovation.

by agscala 14y ago

I kind of feel bad for Craigslist. Everyone is attacking them for wanting to hold onto their data. I don't think that they should be obligated to let just anyone scrape it

jonursenbach 14y ago

No, but there is clearly use cases for Craigslist having an API. Instead of suing everyone who wants to use their data to make beautiful products, they should be giving people legal ways of doing so.

gamble 14y ago
The problem for Craigslist is that the one thing people want is a better interface. If CL provides an API people can use to build an alternative frontend, and users start to go to these frontends instead of CL itself, there's nothing to stop those new frontends from extending CL with their own listings, and eventually extinguishing it. That was PadLister's business model.
- iamwil 14y ago
  Padlister/Padmapper doesn't make money from from CL listings. Padlister charges money if listers listing directly on Padlister decides to use the online application.
robterrell 14y ago
Apparently they offered PadMapper paid access but PadMapper declined. Articles like this make PadMapper look even worse to me. And sloppy journalism. Why won't anyone ask PadMapper why they decided against? This is like half of a linkbait article. The fact that CL offered paid access was in last week's HN stories. I bet there's a breathless follow-up article with that fact, trolling for additional page views.
- Mazy 14y ago
  Craigslist offered padmapper a license for using their data in mobile applications only. They gave him no options for padmapper.com
- iamwil 14y ago
  Most users use padmapper through the website. CL offered a license only for mobile apps, which, depending on your point of view "a license with a crappy option, but a license nonetheless", or "a license that's completely not applicable".

aggronn 14y ago

But does that mean its okay for them to sue anyone who does? If they make the information public, how could they think they have a right to keep their data private from applications they think could be a competitive threat? Should Walmart sue Target if target scrapes walmart prices to help make decisions about their own online pricing schemes? In what way is it "their data" if they release it to the public? The law is pretty clear about this--facts can't be copyrighted. They don't own the facts. They don't own the bits that padmapper is referencing. All they own is the db records for the posts that originated the information. Imagine if they had a CL user meetup in public somewhere, and then they charged users to use a megaphone to announce that they were selling something. Someone writes down the information and has their own meetup for people who couldn't make it to the free, public CL meetup. Whats the difference between that and what padmapper is doing, except that padmapper is getting the information second hand? If CL thinks they have a right to their data, they should be suing google should they?

smashing 14y ago
"...they[Craigslist] charged users to use a megaphone to announce that they were selling something." I don't get where you came up with that. It wasn't in the article at all.
- aggronn 14y ago
  I wasn't referencing the article.
anamax 14y ago
> The law is pretty clear about this--facts can't be copyrighted. While it is true that "facts can't be copyrighted", it's unclear that Craigslist listings qualify as facts in the relevant sense. (The singles listings, for example, surely don't.) > Someone writes down the information and has their own meetup for people who couldn't make it to the free, public CL meetup. Whats the difference between that and what padmapper is doing, except that padmapper is getting the information second hand? Getting the information second-hand seems fairly significant. Don't get me wrong - I think that craigslist should be disrupted, but I don't think that you should just do the easy parts. Note that the NYT has a dog in this fight - Craigslist has "disrupted" the newspaper biz.

jacoblyles 14y ago

I don't know about anyone else, but I'm attacking them for being an evil monopoly. If there were other viable services, I wouldn't care so much. They are the IE6 of classified ads. And just like IE6 they are holding back innovation.