Unfortunate: Twitter Forces Flattr To Stop Its Twitter Integration
from the well-that-sucks dept
Just a few weeks ago, we wrote about how Flattr had integrated with services like Twitter and Instagram to make it incredibly easy to support content creators (including us!) by just favoriting a tweet. Not surprisingly, in the first month after that went into effect, we saw a boost in revenue from Flattr. Unfortunately, Flattr has now announced that Twitter has forced the company to stop this integration.Flattr had been using the Twitter API to figure out what people had favorited, and had been gathering data about the specific tweets. However, Twitter told the company that it was violating section IV. 2 C from its API terms. That term says that:
Your advertisements cannot resemble or reasonably be confused by users as a Tweet. For example, ads cannot have Tweet actions like follow, retweet, favorite, and reply. And you cannot sell or receive compensation for Tweet actions or the placement of Tweet actions on your Service.It's that last part where the trouble came in. Of course, it seems clear that that particular line in the terms of service was designed for situations where people are "selling" tweets or something similar. Not for cases where a service like Flattr is helping people make money from supporters. In response, Flattr even said that it would waive its standard 10% fee on any Flattrs that come via tweets. Twitter told them it wasn't good enough. Now, you can argue that "rules are rules," but rules need to make some sense. And it's unclear what kind of sense this makes. There's nothing about the way in which Flattr is using Twttier that is negative for Twitter. It seems like a really nice and useful addition. Obviously, we're somewhat biased, because it also helped us make a few bucks (not much, but some), but I can't see how it makes sense for Twitter to block this functionality.
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: api, integration, micropayments, payments
Companies: flattr, twitter
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
-Another community based revenue service directly benefiting content creators.
-An incentive for existing industries and media personalities to improve their social correspondence and direct community involvement.
-A means of supporting an individual/organization/etc. directly with little hassle.
-A way for people to budget community support and spread that support wider than they otherwise would have had the time/motivation to.
Twitter's View:
-Someone is using our service in a financial manner and we don't own them. Put a stop to it.
I don't care what people say, the problem with society isn't a lack of control, its an overreach of it...
As usual, the view seems to be 'Innovation is the enemy, unless we're the ones doing it!'.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Justify for me, Degreed Economist, Flatter's "standard 10% fee".
Yes, relevant to topic because no one should ever get past such a huge question: where the HELL do they get the chutzpah to charge TEN PERCENT for doing almost nothing? Mike's topic here isn't even ten percent of the real story!
And I've been meaning to note the rampant and frequent mis-use here of "unfortunate". Mike, that means a bad outcome of chance, not just any and every event you deem bad, and particularly NOT when done purposefully.
Am I going to get to the instant topic? ... Let me see. -- WELL, obviously, Mike, you need to school Twitter on how to run that biz too. They're doing it all wrong!
^^^ My clone. Heh, heh. I'm unrivaled on this or any other web site: how many of you are thought important enough to either mock or copy?
Take a loopy tour of Techdirt.com! You always end up same place!
http://techdirt.com/
You've found the site of Internet Quipper Mike "Streisand Effect" Masnick!
17:22:03[t-485-3]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Justify for me, Degreed Economist, Flatter's "standard 10% fee".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Justify for me, Degreed Economist, Flatter's "standard 10% fee".
By the way, do you have a breakdown of Flattr's development and running costs, or is the assumption that they do virtually nothing (and/or have no overheads) just another one of those things you pull from your ass because you don't have the knowledge to think things through?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Justify for me, Degreed Economist, Flatter's "standard 10% fee".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Justify for me, Degreed Economist, Flatter's "standard 10% fee".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Justify for me, Degreed Economist, Flatter's "standard 10% fee".
People designated that service worth the proposed investment.
Fee justified.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Didn't we already learn from Google v Oracle that one doesn't need permission to use an API because under copyright only implementations are covered, not specifications. On what basis can Twitter prevent someone else from making an app that integrates with their service?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If Flattr wanted to create a twitter clone and duplicate the Twitter API, Google vs. Oracle says that they can.
But this is Twitter controlling who can call its API which they are perfectly able to do. It's nothing to do with copyright, it's simply twitter's right to decide who they provide a service to.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
https://twitter.com/btctip
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And if you think about it Twitter does exact that, it monetizes over all the tweeting.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Collecting without approval
Therefore, I am not sure Twitter does have an obligation to allow a company to say it is representing people it isn't actually representing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Collecting without approval
When they decided to integrate with Twitter there was a problem: sometimes people flattred tweets and accounts that did not use Flattr. So instead of keeping the money to themselves Flattr SAVED that money so these people could claim that.
Since it's bound to the Twitter account then the risk of being misappropriated is likely zero.
Flattr never stated they represent anyone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Collecting without approval
When they decided to integrate with Twitter there was a problem: sometimes people flattred tweets and accounts that did not use Flattr. So instead of keeping the money to themselves Flattr SAVED that money so these people could claim that.
But you are saying what I said. The money goes to Flattr in the name of someone. If that someone doesn't know about it, the money is "saved" for them. But Flattr gets the money until it is claimed, right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Collecting without approval
Flattr publicly said what was going to happen and how and they even put the main Twitter accounts that received more 'flattrs' and thus more money in their front pages. I think this is much much better than simply saying "oh well, they don't have a Flattr account so we'll just keep the money" or simply splitting that money with other flattrd.
Is it clearer now?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Collecting without approval
Yes, I got this the first time I read about Flattr. However, it appears that if someone you select doesn't have a Flattr account, that money doesn't go to them. We are still saying the same thing, but are interpreting it differently. The payer attempts to give the money to someone, but if Flattr doesn't have a contact for the person being selected, that person doesn't get the money.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Collecting without approval
When you flattr a creator on YouTube, Soundcloud, Instagram, Github, Flickr, Vimeo, 500px or App.net that hasn’t yet signed up to Flattr that microdonation will be an unclaimed flattr.
Unclaimed flattrs are not be taken from your monthly budget, until they sign up. The month the creators signs up, is the month that flattr will be a part of your budget. The creator will then get the money on the 10th the coming month.
http://blog.flattr.net/2013/03/when-you-flattr-somebody-that-isnt-a-flattr-user-unclaimed- flattrs/
Martin
www.flattr.com
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Collecting without approval
Yes, I get that. But I was suggesting a reason Twitter might not want the service. A fan can flattr someone, but if that someone hasn't indicated he/she wants to be part of the service, then flattr is being connected to someone who hasn't asked to participate.
But let me clarify, then. You're saying that if I flattr thousands of people who haven't signed up for flattr, then you aren't taking any money from me? I DON'T need to pay you if no one I want to flattr is using your service?
Or are you saying that I DO need to pay you, but the money doesn't go to any people if they haven't signed up for the service and it sits in an escrow account?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]