John Battelle breaks it down:
As the debate deepens, it seems there are two camps - first, the camp that says Facebook has either A. a right and/or B. an economic necessity to create a walled garden for our data. The second camp argues that Facebook - and any other walled garden - is A. Stupid or B. Greedy or C. Both.
Battelle goes on to argue that framing the debate in this way misses the real point, and I agree. IMHO, the real question is not whether or not users own their information and should be able to take it with them. I believe that they do, and they should. Facebook does not own our information, they just help us organize it and make it useful. What Facebook owns is the means by which they organize the information (algorithms), the ways they structure their data (friends, groups, networks), and the ways they present it to the users (profiles, news feed). Their competitive advantage is not the information they store, but the services they provide around and through that information. And like Battelle, I believe that Facebook will recognize this and give users an easy way to export the social graph.
Some have attempted to frame this as a privacy debate, as well. Should my Facebook friends be able to export key information that I’ve shared with them on the service for use in other applications? Carr says it another way:
Now, if you happen to be one of those “friends,” would you think of your name, email address, and birthday as being “Scoble’s data” or as being “my data.” If you’re smart, you’ll think of it as being “my data,” and you’ll be very nervous about the ability of someone to easily suck it out of Facebook’s database and move it into another database without your knowledge or permission. After all, if someone has your name, email address, and birthday, they pretty much have your identity - not just your online identity, but your real-world identity.
At first I was in total agreement with this. But you have to take a step back sometimes, and think of relationships outside of the Internet. Sharing information with someone, regardless of the context, is licensing them with the right to keep that information for their personal use. Essentially, you’re handing them your business card. Taking information out of Facebook and putting it elsewhere is like putting that business card in your Rolodex, or typing the information on that card into your online address book. You give someone that information to make it useful, not for it to be holed up and of little-to-no value to your friend.
But in the same spirit, I don’t think Scoble and Plaxo’s actions are excusable. Facebook may have our information under lock and key right now, but that doesn’t give anyone the right to try and break in. The method that Scoble used to export his information was the same method a hacker or spammer would use to seize information and use it for nefarious or commercial purposes. That’s why Facebook doesn’t show e-mail addresses as text, but rather as pictures.
The onus is on Facebook to open up and give users a safe, secure way to export their information. It is neither the duty nor the right of users or other companies to breach the Terms of Use and attempt to gather that information themselves. I am especially shocked that Plaxo unabashedly proceeded with the development of this feature when it knew the service would violate Facebook’s Terms of Use. Like Arrington said in his post, that just goes against common sense.
Image used under a Creative Commons license from Flickr user luc.
Jrod– I’m going to have to jump in here and disagree, simply because I think the business card analogy is a false parallel to draw here. The fact is, a facebook profile is much more than a business card–in all the best and worst ways. Sure I might not mind Scoble or others being able to freely port my contact info or carefully chosen identifying data (a la a business card, where every detail, logo, affiliation is carefully chosen) into whatever app he pleases…but what about more sensitive things like who I’m dating, what my political and religious beliefs are, even what books I like and music I listen to? I would never put that info on a business card to hand out to people I don’t know…and many on facebook likely go to far with how liberally they share personal information, photos etc (remember all of those lectures from career services types on how our future employers would parse our facebook accounts?). I agree that name, contact info, etc is different…but as of now there’s no differentiation (to Scoble, on facebook, etc) between my email address and my relationship status. I find that a little anxiety-inducing.
I completely agree with your concerns. That’s why I think Facebook itself must continue to be vigilant in cracking down on scraping, while at the same time providing a legitimate means of exporting the information. And you are absolutely right that Facebook must give users the privacy controls necessary to limit how much information Facebook can allow others to export about them. This is similar to the News Feed privacy controls… you control what sorts of information, or “stories,” are exportable. So if I want my full profile to be exportable, I can have that; if you want only your name, picture, and e-mail address to be exportable, you can have that. Basically, the metaphor is that Facebook allows you to design the “business card” that you’re going to let other people keep (and, potentially, pass on to others). My point is that if Facebook doesn’t find a way to export the information itself, then people will continue to steal that information illicitly.
The one counterpoint I will make is this. I know it is uncomfortable to think that someone could either scrape or download information that wouldn’t fit into my first “business card” metaphor - relationship details, drunken photos, etc. But that person can ALWAYS publicize that information manually. I could go to your profile, take a screen shot, and post it on this blog. That’s why the whole new concept of “friending” in the social network context is dangerous. Is someone enough of a “friend”, do you trust them enough, to let them have access to that information even privately? The more interconnected the web becomes, the more we have to be careful about what we put online, even if it is behind very carefully designed privacy controls.