

Scribd Puts My Old Uploads Behind a Paywall and Goes Onto My Shitlist - maconic
http://blog.ericgoldman.org/personal/archives/2010/09/scribd_puts_my.html

======
thaumaturgy
I think there are a few takeaways here:

* You have to charge from the very beginning. If you start a free service, and then try to establish a pay system afterward, your users will feel tricked and trapped and they will rebel loudly. Scribd seems to have been in a hurry to get adoption, so they made it free to host documents; as this guy said though, he much preferred hosting with Scribd over doing it manually on his university's web server. That could have been Scribd's value proposition, and a small yearly fee for that probably would have worked OK.

* SaaS could get itself in trouble if there are too many incidents like this. I already hear from clients that are concerned about using online services; the most common questions are, "What if they change their terms?", "What if they go away?", and those are legitimate concerns. Many of my clients aren't the most computer-interested people, so if they have concerns like that, then that means that stories like this have penetrated very deep into the consumer market.

~~~
masklinn
> If you start a free service, and then try to establish a pay system
> afterward, your users will feel tricked and trapped and they will rebel
> loudly.

If you lock behind a paywall things previously available for free, sure. And
they'll be right too.

An other option is to add features which are only behind a new paywall. Issue
then is providing additional services of value and a way for users to discover
them.

~~~
thaumaturgy
Just as a case study, Reddit did exactly that, and their users _flipped out_.
Reddit ended up doing OK with it -- they've made at least enough from it to be
able to afford some infrastructure upgrades and at least one new hire -- but
there was a pretty vocal not-small group of users that were unhappy about it.

~~~
30thElement
The initial response was to flip out, but once people realized reddit wasn't
going to switch to a pay-only site the outrage died down. It might have only
worked because reddit users/admins try so hard to foster a sense of community,
but it seemed to me like reddit showed how to set up a pay service correctly,
and people were just too jaded because of sites like Scribd to realize it.

~~~
thaumaturgy
> _...once people realized reddit wasn't going to switch to a pay-only site
> the outrage died down._

I'm not very active in Reddit anymore -- HN is my last distraction now -- but
I did watch that situation carefully because it was interesting. I got the
sense that the outrage died down only because Reddit promised to migrate its
paid features into the "free" arena. Until then, a lot of people were angry
that there was going to be some kind of "elite" class on the site.

Practically speaking, even if Reddit had managed to permanently piss off this
chunk of its userbase, I doubt they would have left altogether, and even if
they did, there's no way to gauge what fraction of Reddit's traffic was really
represented by these guys. It could've been (and probably was) just a tempest
in a teapot.

But either way, in that specific case, there would have been some vocal
rebellion if the paid-for features stayed locked behind a paywall.

~~~
masklinn
> I got the sense that the outrage died down only because Reddit promised to
> migrate its paid features into the "free" arena. Until then, a lot of people
> were angry that there was going to be some kind of "elite" class on the
> site.

As a Charter and gold reddit member... not really. It was well understood
early on that most of the "gold" features would be stuff that was too
expensive (computationally) to give to everybody (especially before the server
upgrade), at least from the start.

The great fear gripping everybody was truly that Reddit would somehow become
"for-pay", and that content previously free would now become non-free (a fear
which didn't make much sense as the community is the one providing the
content, and the admins might not be too media and ad-savvy, but they're not
stupid)

> But either way, in that specific case, there would have been some vocal
> rebellion if the paid-for features stayed locked behind a paywall.

Doubtful. 1000 comments/thread is a nice feature for instance, but it didn't
exist (at all) before gold and it's not exactly a deal-breaker.

------
jacoblyles
Early Scribd broke the web by taking open format documents, putting them in a
proprietary wrapper, and calling it a "service".

Middle Scribd fixed their own brokenness by moving to HTML 5 (which is
sometimes more convenient than a PDF, and is certainly "open" and accessible).

Late Scribd is again breaking the web by moving documents behind a paywall.
Some qualities are just baked into a company's DNA.

~~~
al3x
Thank you. I've never understood why Scribd exists at all. The web has done
fine at moving documents around before Scribd, and it'll keep doing it fine
long after they disappear.

~~~
daleharvey
emailing pdf's is not my definition of "doing fine", I am not following the
current drama much, but I do thank scribd for letting me look at content I
would have otherwise ignored on seeing ".pdf"

~~~
nkohari
I always thought that Scribd was just a reaction to how awful Adobe's free PDF
reader has become.

~~~
chmike
What is the problem with pdf ? Editing a document in html is too painful.

~~~
pyre
What does that quality of Adobe's pdf _reader_ have to do with the ease of
_editing_ documents in html or pdf?

------
ianbishop
I can't actually believe that they would go the paywall route. It honestly
seemed a few months ago when they added HTML5 support that they were going in
a really great direction and now I will avoid them like the plague.

~~~
points
I think the whole HTML5 thing was a big PR exercise to improve the way they
are seen. Possibly also a big play to get acquired - "We're doing cool stuff
with fonts! Buy us!".

Fundamentally though, they're about locking away documents behind a pay wall.
And personally, I don't see their value proposition at all.

~~~
inerte
Scribd's HTML5 was about having crawlable (read: show up in Google) content.

Nothing wrong with that, btw.

~~~
acqq
I think it was just about "gaming Google" -- at some point the links to pages
on scribd had higher ranks than original pdfs. I consider that more like
successful spamming of Google search than long-term feature.

How is it now? Do they still have higher rank? I'd consider than that a bug in
Google ranking.

------
mmastrac
From the FAQ (this is crazy):

Your documents will automatically be entered into the Archive after an initial
period of time. You can recall a document from the Archive by opening the
document's properties, clicking the Archive Status tab, then clicking the
Recall from Archive command. If a document's properties page doesn't have an
Archive Status tab, then that document has not yet been placed into the Scribd
Archive. To learn how to edit your documents' properties, please see our
Writer's Guide.

After a couple months your document will return to the Archive, and you can
repeat this process to recall it again.

~~~
tzs
Or you can go change the global setting so that none of your documents go into
the archive.

~~~
mmastrac
Conveniently not mentioned in the FAQ.

I changed it for my own account only after reading the article. Funny enough,
it's an inversely-worded checkbox in there (unlike all of the other options):

[ ] Do not include my documents in the Scribd Archive program. Learn more.

------
kingkilr
I don't care if they want to establish a paywall, that's there perogative,
what I don't like is taking my content, which I uploaded under the belief I'd
be able to host it there at no cost to end users (persumably subsidised by
ads) and then charging my readers for it. I post my content (mostly slides
from talks and such) for readers, I'd probably even pay to put my content
there, it's rather convenient.

~~~
dataguy
The last part: Absolutely. They got it the wrong way. I mean - okay - they
have the right to establish the paywall.

But they are scare off the wrong people: the readers. Why use a service to pay
for reading something that the publishers WANT to give me for free? Not
enough: Many publishers would pay for it, as it is convenient and absolutely
user friendly.

This won't work. Well no, actually it will work - but not as a service that
proclaims "show your work to the world for free".

------
storm
I've never seen the appeal of Scribd, and I'm no fan of the direction they
seem to be stumbling in, but it seems a bit unfair to dismiss invitations to
join a user advisory board and/or come visit them as "not much of a response".

Even if both are mere PR exercises, it's an improvement on the kind of
content-free hand waving I'd expect from a company desperately seeking
profitability.

~~~
BrandonM
Exactly. How can he call this "not much of a response?" As you pointed out,
the message said, "I'd also like to extend an open invitation for you to come
in and meet the team." To me, that sounds like a free trip to give direct user
feedback and have a real chance to make a positive change.

Instead, it sounds like Mr. Goldman just wants to bitch. He feels like Scribd
used him? Did he not use Scribd? At least Scribd provided value to him (as he
indicated); whatever value he provided Scribd, he is now trying to destroy it
with this blog post.

There was a submission on here last week: _If you are not paying for it,
you're not the customer; you're the product being sold._
(<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1684732>).

I never use Scribd, and I'm not really concerned either way with how
successful they are. But I'm starting to get really annoyed with everyone's
sense of entitlement these days. Louis CK hit it on the nose with his remark,
"How quickly the world owes him something he knew existed only ten seconds
ago." (<http://barefootmeg.multiply.com/video/item/56> \- it's a great clip if
you haven't seen it)

~~~
state_machine
Well, it's "not much of a response" since it doesn't respond to his concerns.
Inviting him to give further feedback is great and all, but while it
acknowledged his issues with the Archive paywall (just by saying they could
tune it -- not with a concrete solution), it completely ignored his privacy
complaint about broadcasting reading activity.

Basically, it was a response, but "not much" of one.

------
patio11
Guys: you could write your next software for people like this gentleman, _or_
you could write it for a 50 year old woman who pays money for software and
services. Choose wisely.

~~~
Robin_Message
Indeed. I also thought the following comment from Scribd showed what is wrong
with their mindset:

    
    
      As a start-up, we're constantly trying to strike the right
      balance: building products that people love but that also
      help us make money (to cover server cost and everything
      else associated with running a company).
    

Umm, surely as a company you are trying to do more than cover your running
costs? Or are the saying "As a start-up" profitability is irrelevant and all
they care about is covering their costs whilst increasing their market share?
A larger share in a market no-one is actually willing to pay for is not worth
more than a smaller one, what with them both being worth nothing and all.

~~~
gthank
A lot of people have these things they call lifestyle businesses: if they're
meeting payroll and expenses, and loving what they do for a living, they've
100% satisfied their goals.

I'm not sure that's what is going on in Scribd's case, though.

------
kmfrk
This reminds me of chi.mp. I recently suspected that my Gmail was hacked, so I
clicked maniacally to get to the page where I could reset my password.

I discover that my chi.mp account is the back-up e-mail, which is great; the
service lets me decide which e-mail address to forward to.

I go to chi.mp, think for a minute to remember my password, and get to the
e-mail-forwarding screen. The account is set to forward to an e-mail address
that is inconvenient (I can't remember the reason), so I remove the forwarding
I've set up and---

"Something, something, you need a Pro account to create a forwarding address."

What the hell is a Pro account, I think to myself, a thought that is quickly
eclipsed by the fact that a) The guys screwed me over without telling me, and
b) I have no way of saving my e-mail account from a potential invader, unless
I pay these <expletive>s.

I have yet to e-mail them and give them shit for it, but I didn't want to let
it ruin my week, but I'll be sure to contact them when I can muster the time
and energy.

~~~
kareemm
HopToadApp.com did the same to me. About a year ago, I signed up for their
free plan. It allowed two users, so I added our lead engineer.

Recently, he left and we added another engineer. So I removed engineer #1 and
couldn't add engineer #2 unless I paid to upgrade the account. I don't mind
paying when it makes sense, but a) HopToad was totally unwilling to
grandfather the account, which meant I couldn't add the new engineer, and b)
there was no messaging that the plan changed. I found out about it when I
tried to add engineer #2. Lame.

------
ulf
Sometimes, when reading pieces like this, I think it is time that we as
internet users reach a certain point in our understanding of entitlement.
There are so many services we readily use, most free of charge, while some of
them provide a huge service to us. Some even make us money. But if the service
providers themselves try to validate their business by making money out of it
in some way, we start bitching...

I do not especially condone what Scribd is doing here, nor can I say I would
have anticipated that behaviour (harvesting interesting content and
subsequently making the whole service pay-only is not the dumbest thing ever),
but if you take a second when you first start using a service and try to think
about the fact that they some day will have to make money, you should be able
to get some conclusions. What options does the provider of the service have to
make money at all? Which of these options would be ok for me? Which would piss
me off badly? And how do I avoid being in a trap like the OP?

If one thinks about those questions instead of just feeling entitled to use a
service, which might be "free" at the moment, the awakening should not be to
abrupt.

~~~
ajscherer
I would flip that around on you: I think it is time that companies reach a
point in their understanding of users' reaction to the bait & switch.

The value of your service to a user isn't going to increase simply due to the
passage of time or growth of your site. If they wouldn't pay for it on day 1,
the odds are they won't pay for it after 2 years of using the service. If, in
the process of trying to monetize your service, you "hold hostage" a portion
of the value that the user has contributed to your site, they are going to be
pissed.

This has all happened many times now. I think companies trying this route in
the first place will be easier to change than peoples' reaction to it.

~~~
trustfundbaby
> I think it is time that companies reach a point in their understanding of
> users' reaction to the bait & switch.

For real. This always reminds me of the dude who tries to be friends with the
girl so he can eventually date her, instead of simply asking her out, and
risking the 'No' like a man.

Slimy.

~~~
matwood
It's also the wrong way to go about because once you end up on the friends
ladder it's almost impossible to cross the abyss. ;)

<http://www.laddertheory.com/ladderconstruction.htm>

------
noonespecial
Getting a bunch of people to give your free service content and then suddenly
changing policy so that you can charge for that submitted content always felt
pretty sleazy to me.

Kind of like raising a bunch of money for starving orphans and then buying
yourself a yacht.

------
ilamont
I have content hosted there too and value the "open access" spirit, but would
also like to see Scribd develop a viable business model. An alternative is the
service will close down and everything -- both free and archived -- will go
away.

Another question: Besides an archive paywall, what else could the company do
to build revenue (such as professional services, print-on-demand, etc.)

~~~
acqq
> I have content hosted there too

Can you please or anybody else explain me why you see any added value of
scribd at all? I see it only as an annoyance. If I'd like to read a pdf I'd
prefer to click on the link and read it, not to go to some suspicious site
which demands from me to sign up there only to do what otherwise would be one
single click.

As far as I know the only "advantage" of the service was to make content
infringement easier (a site for documents which is like youtube was for
videos), and that the site owners expect people to pay for access to it is
hardly surprising. But I like other mechanisms more.

My suggestion for everybody who is the owner of his own documents and wants to
upload them: host them as the normal files on the normal sites, unless you do
want people to pay for access to them.

~~~
_delirium
I don't use it myself, but reasons people I know have used it:

1\. They don't have webspace and want to put a PDF somewhere online.

2\. They do have webspace, but are worried, possibly unnecessarily, that it'll
cost them too much money if they send out a link to a big PDF to a large-ish
mailing list.

3\. For Mac users, where PDFs don't load in a plugin in the browser by
default, they want to be able to link to a PDF that opens in the browser
instead of popping up an external viewer.

4\. And, yes: They have a PDF that is at best gray-area which they want to
distribute without hosting it themselves, like a scan of a book chapter for a
reading group.

~~~
narkee
>3\. For Mac users, where PDFs don't load in a plugin in the browser by
default, they want to be able to link to a PDF that opens in the browser
instead of popping up an external viewer.

FYI, PDFs absolutely load in the browser by default.

~~~
_delirium
Hmm, is that only for Safari? On my OSX machine, Firefox pops up PDFs in an
external instance of Preview by default. Presumably I could install the
Acrobat plugin, but it doesn't seem to come with it, or to be able to find one
already installed on the system. But if Safari does show them inline, then I
agree I was wrong about the "default" behavior, since Safari is the default
browser.

~~~
gammarator
Better: use this plugin: <http://code.google.com/p/firefox-mac-pdf/>

It uses the native Quartz PDFKit backend.

------
moondowner
If people put the documents available for download for free, I think they
should be left that way, no one likes someone else to makes actions for them
without their knowledge.

Everybody is surprised when someone tells him "Why have you made the document
available for download only via purchase?"

If they don't fix this thing soon I'll stop using Scribd completely.

Also, a really funny sentence in the response from Scribd:

> You’re right that our communication around the Archive should have been more
> clear.

It sounds like, yeah, we know, but we like it this way for now.

------
tzs
In the time it took him to write his rant, he could have clicked the checkbox
to make all of his old content available for free again.

When you use a free service, you have to expect them to need to make money
somehow--and that means you should expect them to try changing the mix of what
is free and what is paid now and then, and changing defaults. Accordingly, you
should expect that on occasion you might have to change settings in order to
get the thing to work the way you like.

------
alexyim
I feel that the main issue is the lack of open and direct communication with
the users.

Sure, making the paywall opt-in by default increases conversions. But you
still have to tell the user about it rather have them discover one day that a
lot of their documents are no longer being read. That sucks.

------
mikecane
People still don't understand all of the things they are agreeing to on sites
like this:

Scribd Creator Terms Of Service
[http://ipadtest.wordpress.com/2010/05/06/scribd-creator-
term...](http://ipadtest.wordpress.com/2010/05/06/scribd-creator-terms-of-
service/)

~~~
jacquesm
A whole pile of data on scribd was never uploaded by the original owners
though, but by people posting links to pdfs to sites like HN.

~~~
acqq
Can anybody please tell me why does HN actively support such a site?

~~~
jacquesm
Because YC invested in it.

------
maconic
Thanks to everyone for the feedback and comments, Scribd just announced they
are making changes: [http://blog.scribd.com/2010/09/21/the-scribd-archive-an-
apol...](http://blog.scribd.com/2010/09/21/the-scribd-archive-an-apology-and-
immediate-changes)

------
motters
This reminds me of what happened at the end of the dot com bubble, where the
hasty erection of a paywall usually meant that the death of a site was
imminent, and users often did feel "tricked and trapped" or that their
community relationships had been violated.

------
ax0n
Relevant:
[http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/cartoon_the_only_consta...](http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/cartoon_the_only_constant.php)

~~~
adorton
That's not realistic at all. If Facebook really did that to your car, they
wouldn't leave the note.

------
jmount
This kind of service is just another "Brill's content" type scam.

------
folbec
if anything is "free", YOU are the product sold.

------
underdown
"readcasting" sounds like an excellent SEO siloing play. Lots of inter-related
internal links. Good google-fu.

------
aneth
I've encountered a few documents that were 1 page application forms for
community resources, and all were shocked when those were suddenly behind a
rather expensive paywall. I also was really annoyed the first time I noticed
some obscure document I read was broadcast to all my "followers." That means
I've encountered both of these major beefs myself. I was never a scribd user,
but I sure as hell would never use them now. This is not an issue of not
charging early - it's expertsexchange all over again.

------
sscheper
That paywall pays for hosting, the platform and the tools that guy used--not
to mention the fact that it also pays for hundreds of jobs and fuels the
entrepreneurial economy. If that causes a benign blogger to add the service to
his or her shitlist, then I think Scribd will live on.

------
unohoo
Did you try contacting them to clarify ? If so, what was their response ?

~~~
tshtf
He did. From the post:

 _As a courtesy, I sent a prepublication draft of the above post to Scribd's
press team and asked for a response. They were kind enough to reply to me
pretty quickly with the following_

