Expectations Matter, Even If You're Not 'A Customer'
from the false-distinctions dept
We recently had a discussion about law professor Eric Goldman's complaints about Scribd, after the site, which he'd been using regularly to upload and share legal documents, quietly put up a paywall on older documents without making that clear to users. Suddenly, many old documents that Goldman had thought he was sharing with the world, were hidden behind a lock and key, unless you paid up.While many people agreed that this was a mistake on the part of Scribd, in talking with Goldman separately about this, he noted that a few people strongly disagreed with his position, and noted (accurately) that he was getting a free service from Scribd, and thus he was "not a customer" and shouldn't complain at all. We received a few similar comments here, effectively suggesting that if you're not paying, you're not a customer and, thus, have no right to complain.
This is silly -- and wrong. It's where the often artificial distinction between "customer" and "user" and "product" gets blurry and, at times, questionable, especially in the realm of "user-generated" content. There are more ways to "pay" than with money. In Goldman's case, he's actually been "paying" Scribd by providing it with valuable, sought-after content that he uploads. Scribd is "paying" Goldman with free hosting, bandwidth and services. Advertisers are "paying" Scribd with money. Users are "paying" Scribd with their attention. All are "customers" in some sense, while also being users and, potentially, "the product," as well. Focusing only on the relationships where actual cash exchanges hands misses the point (greatly).
Once you realize that, it makes perfect sense for Goldman to complain. He was using the service under pretty explicit terms that he was providing these documents to share them with the world. Scribd unilaterally (and quietly) changed those terms on him, to something completely different. In turn, by pissing off Goldman, and having him seek alternatives, Scribd is actually harming its overall site. Even if you accept the narrow definition of "customer," to suggest that Scribd's only customers are their advertisers, pissing off Goldman should still be seen as a problem, because as Goldman uses alternative services, it lessens the "product" that Scribd can offer to those particular "customers."
So rather than going with the kneejerk, "well, if he's not paying for it, he has nothing to complain about," it's important to look at the overall ecosystem, and how different pieces are "paid" in different ways -- and how upsetting one key element of that ecosystem, can harm all sorts of "customers."
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: customers, user generated content, users
Companies: scribd
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Exactly
You can build a house with cards, but you can't start to cater to, e.g., the diamonds, without endangering the whole structure.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Matter of definition
Scribd did something stupid and are not helping themselves, not because they are losing a customer, but because they are losing their product.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Other links
The more people that see this and make a stink, the more that Scribd may be forced to change their services BACK to what made more sense. Right now, the archive (as I read it) was nothing more than an arbitrary paywall for Scribd to make more money off of other's work. Really, why should customers pay to look at information?
What I am having trouble is finding any documents that are currently in the Archive.
I did find this in the FAQ:
"Why do I have to pay for an Archive Subscription to download documents from the Scribd Archive and my friend does not?
jerry Jul 27
We want to reward our most active users. Those who give back to the Scribd community by uploading, participating, commenting, etc. may be able to download from the Scribd Archive without purchasing a subscription."
To me, this really seems lopsided. Basically, if you're a new user, it's like Scribd is punishing you with a "newb tax" for wanting to seek information.
I really hope they take down the paywall, even if I'm not seeing the direct effects right now.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Other links
[ link to this | view in thread ]
A customer is a customer
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mike wants his free lunch
http://issuu.com/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
1.a person who purchases goods or services from another; buyer; patron.
2.a person who buys
3.a person or business that purchases a commodity or service
Using free services or goods does not make you a customer, period. If every business ran without payment, there would be no businesses and therefore no customers.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Scribd doesn't own that content.
Scribd offered free services and people uploaded documents for the good of others.
By erecting a paywall, Scribd is claiming those documents as their own.
Clearly this is wrong, since no one would have uploaded documents to benefit Scribd. Only to benefit others.
Scribd is essentially appropriating other person's property that was entrusted to them in confidence. The posters had an expectation that information would be available freely to others. Or they would never have uploaded it for free.
Know what other website that is doing this?
http://www.experts-exchange.com/
People posted their knowledge on numerous subjects gratis to benefit others- millions of posts. High level technical knowledge, too, collected over several years time.
Now, we get incessant spam trying to sell us "corporate accounts", so we can look up information posted to their site for the benefit of others, not for them.
They misappropriated that knowledge. It's not *theirs*.
Regardless of what they wrote in their TOS.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: sigh
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Scribd doesn't own that content.
:O
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
If every business ran without a product, there would be no businesses, and therefore no products. I suppose Scribd feels that they are contrary to that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Who said every business ran without payment? You didn't even read the post, did you?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Or you flip that and say that Scribd provides server space, bandwidth, formatting, and display capabilities free of charge, without expectation of monetary compensation.
So, you could just as easily claim that Scribed is an "unpaid vendor."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
html5
issue 2: i researched the subject but came up empty...how to self-host embeddable pdf documents. as the html5 standard becomes more and more implemented, hopefully some enterprising young coder will put together such a tool: a plug-in for your c.m.s. to accomplish just that.
after all, it makes sense for a leading professor (mr. goldman) or a leading blogger to be a repository of such documents and resources.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: html5
http://wordpress.org/extend/plugins/google-document-embedder/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
From Websters, to "purchase" means the following:
a archaic : gain, acquire
b : to acquire (real estate) by means other than descent
c : to obtain by paying money or its equivalent : buy
d : to obtain by labor, danger, or sacrifice
ALL definitions except c can refer to obtaining goods for "free" (and even then it can be argued that the content counts as an equivalent to money), and d in this case can certainly refer to the process of gaining service in return for the content that Goldman has provided to them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[mawr-on, mohr-]
–noun
1.a person who is notably stupid or lacking in good judgment.
2.Psychology . a person of borderline intelligence in a former classification of mental retardation, having an intelligence quotient of 50 to 69.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Scribd doesn't own that content.
Of course, this made room for things like stackoverflow.com which is actually a much better site.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
As far as code to get the effect, I would think that can be achieved without too much trouble by people with experience. I have some experience but haven't looked at the webpage source (I imagine it might be iframe maybe and/or surely some javascript and maybe some pre-processing at the server to format everything just right). Maybe I can help research or build this. Lot's of people would probably like to have an alternative. My only interests when it comes to coding software is open source (something like agpl).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
If Person A causes Person B to reasonably rely on Person A, (it must be reasonable for both people to expect the other party to rely) and Person B is harmed by Person A not following through, Person B may have a cause of action. Promissory Estoppel
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Scribd
While I stopped practicing civil and criminal law a long time ago, and now focus narrowly on small entity IP, I remember the relevant classes as if it was yesterday (law is fascinating, when you really get it!).
The law then, and I expect now, is the exchange of benefits creates a contract (thereby making one a "customer"). Scribd has the benefit of a larger viewer base. Marginal benefit? Sure. Adequate? Certainly!
So, paying or not, he is/was a customer!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The mannered sigh
Speaking of which, I wonder if anyone in their right mind, knowing what Scribd has done, would trust them with their own original content? I know I wouldn't. So it seems like poor business practice to me, and please spare us all the the "sigh. it's their site they can do what they want" remarks. I already agree - they can shoot themselves in the foot all they want, for all I care.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Matter of definition
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Scribd
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]