Open Sauce Software
Tasty titbits from people using Linux and other open source software in business.
Monday 7 January 2008, 2:36 PM
Should we have a licence for our identities?
Facebook and Plaxo are arguing over who gets to share their friends' personal data - but just owns that data?
Last week, blogger Robert Scoble incurred the wrath of Facebook by harvesting his Facebook friends' identities to put in his Plaxo address book.
Was Facebook cross because the tool he used
a) infringes his friends' rights?
b) makes it easy for people to get their data out of Facebook, and do their sociail networking elsewhere, eroding the value of all the "social graphs" on Facebook , which in the end is the only thing its multi-billion dollar valuation is based on
or (most likely) c) it simply goes against the Facebook terms and conditions. If you read the small print when you sign up to Facebook, you agree not to do this.
What interests me is the similarity with issues of sharing code. Do we own the details of our identity - and could they be protected by a licence rather than emotive and difficult-to-define privacy rules?
"Perhaps we need creative commons style licenses for personal information- which would allow for non-commercial use, attribution or whatnot," said James Governor of redMonk in an email.
But I don't think copyright in identities would be any easier to define. Is our identity (email, phone number gender, data of borth) etc our own copyright? Is it an original work? did we create it or were we given it? What if someone copies it into their database, but changes something (a mis-spelling, or omitting a redundant postal address line)?
Youi'd have to ensure that the permission notice was always kept attached to the details - a mandatory field in a vCard, say.
Companies obviously would license their contact details in the widest possible way - though they might then want to object if those details were posted on.
There's been a lot of thinking about online identity - and Kim Cameron at Microsoft is a good place to start.
PreviousComments on this post
Plaxo are delibarately trying to distort the situation, A and C are correct. Their intentions are clear; they're trying to steal Facebook users.
Am not a copyright lawyer but as i understand it, my facebook profile is my copyright, the structure of friends "social graph" belongs to Facebook because it's their code that creates it.
Also, that same collection of friends might qualify as a database, in which case Plaxo (or Scobble) would be violating Facebook's database right by extracting it.
the right way to do it, is for Scobble to provide Plaxo with his friends' email addresses, Plaxo will send them an invite, then its their choice to join or not.
I continue to be amazed at how many people misunderstand this issue. First, Facebook is doing EXACTLY what Plaxo did by enabling (encouraging?) their users to import Yahoo! and Gmail address books. How can they (or you) criticize Plaxo for the same darn thing? It's obvious that Facebook is simply protecting it's business and using "your privacy" as their bait. Sheesh.
Furthermore, I own my address book. The paper one in my kitchen drawer, as well as the online ones that I have (Outlook, Yahoo!, Gmail, Facebook, and Plaxo). I decide what information goes into it, not anyone else. If I put your name in my address book, you cannot sue me or make me remove it; similarly for email address, phone number, and all other contact information. Of course, if I do something illegal or unethical with that information you have the right to take action or be outraged. But, this is a rare and practically insignificant concern when compared to the benefits of using an open, online internet. You need to weigh the benefits against the risks. If you are truly concerned that your email address is so private, don't give it to anyone and consider more sophisticated security systems (good luck with that).
Lastly, the fact is no one, besides your friends and business colleagues, really care about your darn contact info. The risk of spam, identity theft, or cloning is remote at best. Spammers already have your information and can acquire it through much easier methods than Facebook and Plaxo.
This hullabalo is a big waste of time and will fade as our demographic gets older and our kids take over.
I continue to be amazed at how many people misunderstand this issue. First, Facebook is doing EXACTLY what Plaxo did by enabling (encouraging?) their users to import Yahoo! and Gmail address books. How can they (or you) criticize Plaxo for the same darn thing? It's obvious that Facebook is simply protecting it's business and using "your privacy" as their bait. Sheesh.
Furthermore, I own my address book. The paper one in my kitchen drawer, as well as the online ones that I have (Outlook, Yahoo!, Gmail, Facebook, and Plaxo). I decide what information goes into it, not anyone else. If I put your name in my address book, you cannot sue me or make me remove it; similarly for email address, phone number, and all other contact information. Of course, if I do something illegal or unethical with that information you have the right to take action or be outraged. But, this is a rare and practically insignificant concern when compared to the benefits of using an open, online internet. You need to weigh the benefits against the risks. If you are truly concerned that your email address is so private, don't give it to anyone and consider more sophisticated security systems (good luck with that).
Lastly, the fact is no one, besides your friends and business colleagues, really care about your darn contact info. The risk of spam, identity theft, or cloning is remote at best. Spammers already have your information and can acquire it through much easier methods than Facebook and Plaxo.
This hullabalo is a big waste of time and will fade as our demographic gets older and our kids take over.
Harpless...'steal Facebook users'? Steal what? Aren't MY contacts mine? don't I have the right to choose HOW I access them and by whatever means I wish to use?
Incidentally, I will happily predict, here and now, that FACEBOOK will be relegated to the 'information landfill' of tomorrow by the emergence of a far more superior model in the not too distant future.
TFD
