RE: [syndication] Moreover Terms and Conditions for free use

["Editor" <editor@content-wire.com>]

This item appears like something I should be following up for a story.
There are a few issues at stake that I'd like to investigate
and I shall take this up with the relevant people in charge,
one of the questions that springs to mind is:

if the aggregator makes a revenue out of content supplied by a third
party, the content provider, is it fair to do so without a revenue share
model?

The question is:
Moreover (I have also been a great supporter) charges me (albeit a nominal
amount) to distribute my headlines
The moment these headlines are free, that's ok, because they are doing me
a service - bring traffic
The moment they charge subscribers for my healines to be distributed, then
I want at least 50% of any money they make by distributing my content

Newisfree does not charge me for distributing my headlines, but should they
make some revenue out of them then I would expect the same.


would that not be fair? Am I missing something?

please comment

pdm





Ben

> it is ludicrously simple.  I will do it if no-one has done it already.
> Really! The end of free service from much-loved middle men moreover and
> newsisfree is motivating...

I always regarded Moreover as one of the best providers of channel-based
news and an important evangeliser for RSS.  Your passing comment about
Moreover interested me and I followed up on Moreover's newly revised Terms &
Conditions:

<quote>
2.1. You may not use the Service in any Commercial properties or
applications,including web sites, intranets, extranets and software
("Commercial Use). Commercial Use includes use on all properties and
applications except those designed and maintained for:

personal use ("personal websites"), i.e. non-corporate web sites, hobby
sites
non-for-profit ("accredited non-profit organizations")
educational use ("accredited educational institutions")
developer use ("open source software"), provided it is not being resold or
used within a commercial framework
</quote>

Have their Terms always been like this or does this represent a new
direction?

My take is that users of client tools such as the Headline Viewer or Radio
are not affected by the commercial use clause since most users are using the
tools in a personal setting.  But anyone who wishes to build a commercial
news service based partly on Moreover feeds is affected, as is anyone who
uses a client tool in a corporate setting.

If the Moreover feeds are gathered and republished by an intermediary (an
aggregator), which is not-for-profit, can Moreover's Terms flow down the
syndication line?  How will Moreover police this?  What happens if the
aggregator publishes a feed which is a mix of 50% Moreover items and 50%
other items (from publishers with different terms)?  Are we at the stage
where digital rights need to be managed on an item-by-item basis?

I suppose that these issues have not been tested so far, in that many news
sites built around RSS are not-for-profit.  Moreover's Terms seem to be
thought out on the premise that their channels are homogenous and
indivisible, but the reality with RSS is that it's very easy to work at the
item level.

James Carlyle
www.xmlTree.com




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/