Recently, Robert Scoble, blogger and self proclaimed technical evangelist (insert snarky comment here), lost all access to his Facebook data by trying to obtain his data. how? why? He scraped. gasp! Oh but its not just about owning your data, its about portable data! It's freedom, baby! He joined Dataportability.org after his cease and desist letter (insert second snarky comment here).
Scoble is just one of many trying to define/redefine the playing field of social data. Some feel that Scoble's effort symbolizes the undercurrent of feelings that users have that the data on social network sites is theirs. Still others come down hard on Scoble arguing that a user agreement is a legal document that should be respected. Is this civil disobedience internet-style or just an obnoxious way to generate blog posts?
Wired lays out the pros and cons of data portability nicely here. But I would like to add my two cents. This debate intrigues me for multiple reasons as a sociologist (yes, all you CS
So, what side of the fence is Brand Maven on?
The Wired article discusses specifically the business logic of scraping (what our friend Scoble did). The author suggests that it's a precarious plan at best depending on external data for your business. hmmm. Really? Then what the f&^$ is a search engine? (And yes, I am too prude to use profanity on the internet.) All an engine does is match you to other's pages. Its a form of scraping but we all agree that it has a purpose and is useful. I know at first glance it may seem like an extreme point but I assure you, it's not. The internet is based on connectivity and data portability. So, I cautiously come down for freeing the social network data.
Internet, it's a brave new world, again.