Dave’s AP Essay Rife With Hypocrisy
June 17th, 2008 by EyeOnWinerThere’s no other way to see it. When the chips are down, the only principle Dave really has is one of selfishness. Today’s write-up on the AP’s legal bullying is a prime example.
He starts, right off the bat, by giving the AP an excuse, saying that because they’re large, they can’t possibly be of “one mind” about this. It’s a cop-out. There might be some internal disagreement, but the legal strategy is unmistakable.
There’s a bizarre comment about the AP being “a not-for-profit cooperative”, conveniently ignoring that while the AP itself is not-for-profit, the entities composing the AP are decidedly for profit. To explore that a bit further, consider one of the suggested reasons for the decline in revenue for many news outlets: bloggers. Consider that the AP is a cooperative of for-profit news entities. The AP is going after bloggers. No connection here? Really?
Dave’s typical attitude towards lawyers is strangely absent, with him insisting that we should try to hear the AP’s side of the story. Why are they sending ludicrous DMCA take-down notices? There must be a reason aside from intimidation, right?
By now, if you’re like me, you’re boggling at how or why Dave is taking the side of an organization that is attempting to lay claim to the news, stop the free flow of information, and is using a bunch of lawyers to try to force it through. What gives?
…
I want to testify on behalf of the AP. I did a deal with them at the end of last year, a quiet one, that the tech community mostly ignored.
FlickrFan. The bloated piece of crap-ware that Dave laments so few people took notice of. More accurately, everyone and their brother downloaded it, realized it was essentially worthless (aside from the AP feeds) and promptly uninstalled it. The AP scratched Dave’s back, and now he’s going to scratch theirs — reprehensible, anti-social legal tactics be damned.
The rest is classic. A massive organization flush with lawyers and cash is sending threatening letters to individuals, many of whom wouldn’t have the money to defend themselves against a traffic citation, let alone a massive IP civil suit… and this is no big deal? NetFlix doesn’t give Dave an easy way to export his movie ratings and he throws a fit, but an organization trying to control who reports the news is just a big joke?
Give me a break.
Dave is a sell-out. He’s probably worried that if he comes out too strongly against the AP they’ll end his sweetheart FlickrFan deal and make the app officially pointless. I would say that was smart business if FlickrFan actually stood to make any money, but it’s really more cowardice than anything.
Speaking of which, why no overt disclosure about the nature of the relationship between himself and the AP? We know that one exists, but we have no idea what the terms are.
What the AP is doing is dangerous. They’re trying to control the news, and they’re starting by pushing people around who they don’t think can defend themselves against it. They’re trying to centralize FACTS to lock everyone in their giant trunk… but I guess as long as Dave and the AP are in bed together, we can count on him to be their Yes-Man.
June 17th, 2008 at 8:01 pm
I think his benevolence might have something to do with the AP starting all this by going after someone Dave was suing not more than a couple months ago. Having opinions based completely on emotion means never having to say you’re a hypocrite.
June 17th, 2008 at 9:59 pm
Also note the hypocrisy in his essay “Who owns your comments?”
http://www.scripting.com/stories/2008/06/09/whoOwnsYourComments.html
“I decided that it’s a mutual thing. I own the collection of comments on my blog, and you own the comments you’ve placed on my blog and all others.”
Ok mister hypocrite winer, if someone owns the comments they posted to your blog, what gives you the right to erase them, since they aren’t your exclusive property? Because we all know you delete comments whenever it suits you.
June 18th, 2008 at 12:18 am
The fact that Rogers Cadenhead is involved, with whom Dave has some (ahem) “history”, may also be a factor.
June 18th, 2008 at 4:12 am
Dave’s position is so inconsistent with his own interests, as a blogger, “media hacker” and a person whose software is reproducing AP content for public use on NewsJunk, that you just have to sit back and marvel. This is a person whose entire self is formed anew each day based entirely on his grievances. I hope AP takes him up on his offer to testify against bloggers who quote its stories. It would be his crowning achievement in hypocrisy.
June 18th, 2008 at 12:57 pm
Dave Winer’s behavior is unpredictable. But there are a few statistically significant patterns:
1) If there’s a mob forming to organize against some person, group or company he will typically start defending the entity under attack. he typically justifies this as a function of empathy because he is attacked so often. He’s also a confirmed contrarian.
What I enjoyed about his defense of the AP’s tactic of using the DMCA was the extended context of his relationship with Roger Cadenhead.
Roger made the mistake of doing business with Dave Winer and paid the price: a legal attack with a demand for all the money Roger’s made working for Dave on a website and the loss of a web site that Roger’s invested in as well: a “share your opml” type of service.
Dave is able to disclose details about his working relationship with some folks at the AP but his only reference to Rogers is as “the blogger”. No empathy or link love for his offending ex-partner in business.
Dave’s ability to disclose context and bias is not one of his better qualities but maybe his self-editing is an effort not to do more harm against the man that saved “weblogs.com” from a complete melt down as blogging took off and started to bury the Frontier-based implementation of the ping service.
Dave subsequently sold weblogs.com for $2.17M as I recall. Arrington negotiated the sale.
Dave never forgets offenses… it’s the assistance and favors he seems to have problems remembering.
For while when anyone mentions “the Blogger” I’ll think of Rogers Cadenhead. The man that gave away “BenedictXVI.com”. The man that wrote the “Radio UserLand Kick Start” book. The man that defended and manged the RSS Advisory Board against the emerging Atom standard (eventually admitting RSS was frozen and controlled one person and was now a dead end spec).
Yes, I’ll think of Rogers Cadenhead as “the blogger”. Because I can’t think of anything else that might distinguish him from that tribe of freeloading, do nothing “content” thieves.
(I feel a bit like Olberman must… after a manic self-righteous rant).
June 18th, 2008 at 5:29 pm
Notice his latest post about how to follow NewsJunk through Facebook (as if any people but wineophiles care)? He set up a Facebook profile under the name “John Newsjunk,” which you must friend-request. As one of the commenters asked, how long before Facebook deletes the account because it isn’t a real person?
http://newsjunk.wordpress.com/2008/06/18/how-to-follow-newsjunk-on-facebook/