
Jason Calacanis’ Backup Plan For Replacing Content: Steal It From Wikipedia - scofflaw
http://smackdown.blogsblogsblogs.com/2010/03/11/jason-calacanis-backup-plan-for-replacing-content-steal-it-from-wikipedia/
======
staunch
Calacanis' fantasy all along was to own Wikipedia but fill it full of ads. He
used to rant endlessly about how much money they'd make if they monetized
Wikipedia. Mahalo is his attempt to make a seedier low-brow version of
Wikipedia that's ad-laden. This move should not be a surprise. That's just my
opinion though.

~~~
3dFlatLander
Kinda off topic, but I think he's right about wikipedia serving ads. They have
so many page views, they could put up a couple of image or text ads on the
side and make it look very tasteful--unlike mahalo and the other ad filled
pages of the internet. Expanding on that, maybe they could only serve non-
profits, giving them ridiculously low click or view rates. How could Jimmy
Wales not be interested in that?

~~~
hristov
It would release a hornet's nest worth of issues. For example advertisers
might change articles in which their ads appear in order to influence click-
troughs. Then contributors will ask for a cut of the money. Then nobody will
donate because they have to look at ads anyway.

Then advertisers will start demanding from their sales people that certain
content be changed or taken off "or I will remove my ads."

So it should only be considered as a desperation move if their donations
plummet.

~~~
jimmyjim
To really think about it now, it's truly remarkable that such a powerful
entity can exist in such a material world, free of spam, ads, etc. I don't
think we cherish this great resource as much as we should.

------
jasonwilk
We really need to stop putting Calacanis discussions on here.

~~~
JacobAldridge
I'm kind of ambivalent on that point. Part of me suspects that bad things
happen when good people just stand by and watch.

I also think each of these is another data point in a Google discussion, more
than about Jason.

~~~
dtby
I don't understand the "bad thing" which is happening here. Are we supposed to
be so thoroughly invested in the quality of Google search results that it's a
personal affront when someone games the system?

~~~
terrellm
The "bad thing" is the inconsistency with Google letting large sites get away
with the shady practices while punishing the little guy.

------
jrockway
Why should I care about this? Because right now, I don't, and I'm about ready
to start flagging any article that mentions Jason Calacanis.

If you hate someone and what they do, don't give them reams of free press!
Nobody would ever have heard of him or Mahalo if it hasn't been for people
whining about him/it on their blog...

Also, the GFDL, one of Wikipedia's licenses, says you can "copy and distribute
the Document in any medium, either commercially or noncommercially".

~~~
JacobAldridge
_"Nobody would ever have heard of him or Mahalo if it hasn't been for people
whining about him"_

Except maybe people completing a Google search looking for meaningful
information, and finding a MFA page with minimal or no content.

~~~
raganwald
Fair enough, but if I do a total reversal of my Canadian Socialist morality
and play free market advocate, isn't this a problem that the market for search
engines can solve? Why can't Bing show off how their search engine ignores
mahalo and other wikipedia scraper sites and thus provides a more useful
experience?

~~~
JacobAldridge
It's a fair point - the consequences won't necessarily be negative -
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1185598>. But is it worth the risk?

------
die_sekte
I am imagining Calacanis as a zombie rummaging through the web, looking for
new content to replace the old content, while being hunted by Matt Cutts who
wears those peril-sensitive sunglasses from The Hitchhiker's Guide.

In some ways this is hilarious.

~~~
jacquesm
I think it's pathetic.

And Matt Cutts doesn't seem to be doing much hunting, it wouldn't take more
than one 'shot' to take mahalo out of circulation.

~~~
die_sekte
Which is why I said that he is wearing those peril-sensitive sunglasses: if I
remember correctly, they would prevent you from seeing anything that could
disturb you.

~~~
jacquesm
No, they're so that you can maintain your cool attitude in the face of extreme
danger. (Because you can't see it).

~~~
ErrantX
Actually at one point they are described as hiding things that might disturb
you too (massive massive hitchikers fan :-))

~~~
jacquesm
You may be right, I'd have to check, but I thought that was the 'SEP', the
somebody-elses's-problem-field.

~~~
die_sekte
The SEP hides things which don't fit into your worldview, the glasses hide
things which might disturb you, which can fit into your worldview or not.

------
Willie_Dynamite
He seems to follow the wikipedia licence.

~~~
jacquesm
So does every other wikipedia clone site. But that's besides the point, he
claims that mahalo is built with their users' content, clearly that is not the
case.

~~~
apowell
Sure, but using Wikipedia content in manner permitted by its license is not
'stealing' it.

~~~
jacquesm
Fair enough, that's a misleading title. 'Lift' instead of 'Steal' or maybe
'copy' would be better.

~~~
jrockway
"Redistribute under the terms of the GFDL."

Let me guess... Linux distributions are "stealing" Firefox? Oh, there isn't
some holy war against that, so it's a good thing. Right.

~~~
bantam
Do Linux distributions take Firefox and laden it with advertisements?

~~~
joeyo
They'd certainly be within their rights if they did.

~~~
Legion
And it is perfectly within everyone else's rights to frown upon it.

The liberal licensing of Free software/content does not mean every use of
those freedoms is a good and positive thing. And nobody is being inconsistent
by treating it as a bad thing, while still recognizing it's within one's
rights to do.

------
froo
I'd be curious to know what the position of Mahalo's investor's are in this
debacle? Are they aware of what they're investing in?

(for reference, Mahalo's investors include Mark Moritz, Elon Musk, Mark Cuban
and Ted Leonsis)

I'd be willing to setup a scraper site this weekend if they want to give me
money too.</sarcasm>

~~~
borism
as long as it makes money, who cares?

~~~
froo
Well, I care.

Not for myself, but you have teams of guys out there building legitimate web
applications that could have a _meaningful_ impact on the web community and
instead, douchebags with scraper sites are getting invested in.

For all we know, we lost the next Youtube (or whatever app you want to talk
about) due to Calacanis' antics (I don't personally hate the guy, I just don't
approve of his methods)

\---

Lastly, apologies for the tardy reply. I've got maxvisit set to 30 and minaway
to 240 mins, so replying won't ever be close to instantaneous.

------
_pius
I am disappointed by the degree to which people are piling on here. When you
run a user generated content site, it's common to seed it any legal way you
can at first. As long as Jason is following the GFDL, I don't see a problem
with using Wikipedia content to kickstart his community and get traction.

~~~
mvandemar
He's not kickstarting it with Wikipedia. Mahalo is not new.

The two main issues with all of these scraped pages is that a) Jason recently
boasted how Wikipedia was, in his words, simply a "free for all" (thus leaving
the impression that he feels that his site was therefore better, being
moderated), and b) that his pages were all UGC built by "his" users, not bots.

~~~
_pius
You've made some valid criticisms of Mahalo in the past, but the content and
tenor of this article makes it look like this has gotten personal for you and
now you're reaching.

 _He's not kickstarting it with Wikipedia. Mahalo is not new._

This isn't about age, this is about size and activity of user base. Again, I
can empathize with anyone trying to bootstrap a UGC business. You practically
_have_ to seed it with content.

 _The two main issues with all of these scraped pages is that a) Jason
recently boasted how Wikipedia was, in his words, simply a "free for all"
(thus leaving the impression that he feels that his site was therefore better,
being moderated), and b) that his pages were all UGC built by "his" users, not
bots._

While both of these are certainly reasons why you may personally find his use
of Wikipedia's content _distasteful_ , neither of them rise to the level of
being "stealing," ban-worthy, or even particularly unethical assuming that
he's in compliance with the appropriate license.

------
orborde
Who is this guy and why do I care?

------
scootklein
for as much as he rips on Jimmy Wales, I'm sure Jimmy would love to make a
spectacle of this

~~~
ewjordan
If he did, he'd make a fool of himself. Wikipedia _explicitly allows_ this
sort of thing, it's one of the founding principles of the site. And I think
it's great, IMO it's one of the reasons the site is so successful.

That someone running a shitty recycled content farm is making money off of it
doesn't alter a damn thing.

And that's not to say that Calacanis is adding anything of value to the web or
anything like that, he's certainly not, as far as I can tell, but I just can't
get too worked up when someone actually makes use of the license freedoms that
we all fight so strenuously to spread...

WTF re: Google, though, I can't believe for one second that this is not on
their radar?

------
neilk
Sometimes, I wish the internet had permabans.

------
MWarneford
Seriously, this level of attention doesn't seem to be rational anymore.

The guy is trying to build a business that creates jobs, and hes putting some
of his own capital on the line to do it. Thats the most important point here -
he's making jobs.

The guy isnt selling blood diamonds or anything, at worst he's gaming a search
engine. Sure, he's using some wikipedia content to run some tests. But,
haven't the same people on here also run tests on their businesses - maybe
incomplete features, bugs, overselling, trying to keep up. Thats all part of
building something from nothing.

Give him a break - he's trying to create more jobs, but hes from a position
where doesn't have to bother.

~~~
ericd
Creating jobs by doing a bad thing to a large number of others is not a net
social good. There are plenty of other problems that good software engineers
should be working on, rather than spamming up the internet for the benefit of
a company that will ultimately funnel a decent percentage of its generated
wealth to a professional troll.

If it ever gets to the point where Calacanis gets a big exit, business
magazine/blog articles will be written about him and how successful he was and
detailing some of what he did to generate that wealth, and some future
entrepreneurs will see that, look up to him, and say "Hm, that doesn't sound
so hard, I can do that too", and then go off and make their own spam sites for
fun and profit.

It's really lose, lose, win (for Calacanis) if we let him get away with that,
and as disproportionate internet users, we're the ones that will be hurt the
most by search engines becoming more spammy.

No break for Mahalo, please. If Google dropped them and all the other MFA
sites, that would be better than 5 Christmases.

~~~
shareme
he will not get the big exit, have you reviewed the long term stats using
quantcast of mahalo.com?

Currently he has to revise and update the feature set to create boom bust
cycles in visitor upswings..and yet long term they only amount to a few
percentage points in growth..

