
Google: Facebook Can’t Import Our User Data Any Longer Without Reciprocity - ssclafani
http://techcrunch.com/2010/11/04/facebook-google-contacts/
======
nkassis
I don't get why the author claims this is a move towards google being more
closed. All they ask is that you share back. According to that argument the
GPL is on the path to closed source.

~~~
jkincaid
Perhaps closed was the wrong word — it's certainly more restrictive, is it
not?

It's my data. If I want to bring it to another service, I should be able to —
at least, that's what Google has been saying for a long time now. Even if my
data is ultimately going to be locked up in this other site, is that not my
decision to make?

~~~
raganwald
Export your data to a file. Import your data into whatever app or service you
like. All Google is saying is that _if_ some other service wants to scrape
your data automatically and with your permission, _then_ they need to let
Google do the same, scrape your data with your permission.

~~~
jkincaid
Valid point, but the hurdle associated with exporting and re-uploading that
data is non-trivial for most people. Is it truly portable if a user can't
figure out how to take it with them in the first place?

Edit: I should add that I think a fairer exchange of information between
Google and Facebook would be a good thing for users. I just think the way
Google is doing this conflicts to some degree with their past mission
statements regarding users owning their data.

~~~
russell_h
Is it truly portable if its impossible to take it with you in the first place?
Because thats what Google seems to be fighting _against_ here.

~~~
extension
Do you think that Google thinks that Facebook is going to give in because of
this? They're not fighting anything. It's a convenient excuse for getting
their users caught in the crossfire. If Google believes that open data is the
right thing to do, then they should be doing it unconditionally, not using it
as a bargaining chip.

------
alanh
All politics and possible ulterior motives aside, this is awesome. I wish more
companies made ballsy moves with the intended effect of giving users more
control!

~~~
prawn
"the intended effect of giving users more control"

Isn't that a side effect? I would've thought that the intended effect was
strengthening Google's position?

~~~
araneae
You're probably right, but I'm quite happy about this. I had to manually get
e-mail addresses from Facebook recently to create a wedding-invitee Google
contacts list. And there have been several situations when I needed a number
from Facebook and had to use my phone to first log into Facebook to get it.

------
guelo
Yea Google is about 3-4 years too late of when this could have affected
Facebook.

~~~
yanw
If nothing else it highlights the Facebook lock-in.

~~~
edanm
Highlights it to whom? Most new users won't realize that the feature existed
and no longer works, most current users obviously don't care. The only people
who will know about this are people who follow tech news - and we already know
that Facebook is closed.

~~~
chopsueyar
This is the beginning of the PR blitz against Facebook's data lock-in by
Google.

------
amanuel
+1 for Google.

When I used to develop Facebook apps, long ago, the primary was blow was no
access to full contact data.

Glad someone with weight is finally standing up and showing them the wrongness
of their approach.

------
waxman
Google's position is completely fair, but they should probably spend more
effort trying to not suck at social, and less effort trying to undermine
Facebook.

It's pretty remarkable how poor their social products have been, especially
compared to other new product initiatives, like Android.

How can Google save its social strategy at this point (other than by trying to
chip away at Facebook with tiny measures like this)?

~~~
sprout
I disagree. I don't want to rely on Google for social. Separation of concerns
is very important.

As is data portability. This isn't an anti-competitive move, this is a pro-
openness move.

------
alain94040
This is bad. First of all, while it clearly targets Facebook, what about my
confidential work contacts that I upload in salesforce or exchange? Now my
company has an obligation to let Google export my contacts?

Second, if you read carefully, the condition is impossible to meet:

 _in a way that’s substantially as fast and easy as exporting such data from
Google Contacts_

I would argue that since Google claims to be the fastest service out there, no
one can be as fast as they are. And when they come with a twice as fast, and
one-click export, it will automatically force hundreds of small apps to align
or die? That doesn't make any sense and was poorly written.

Third, it's my data. I should own it. If I give permission to give it to
Facebook, I don't want Google to have any say or impose any conditions.

~~~
snprbob86
You're over thinking it.

You still have full control over connecting to Google. If you don't want two-
way syncing, and you don't trust it, then don't connect. The clause reads
"agreeing to enable your users to"; i.e. you get to decide when data is
transfered.

Giving permission to Google to share your Google contacts with Facebook is an
inherently different action from giving Facebook permission to share your
Facebook contacts with Google. This clause simply ensures that you have the
choice to go either or both ways.

------
zecg
"This is a move toward being more closed, though Google is positioning it as a
strategy to help make the web more open in the long-term."

This is completely wrong, it is a move towards others being more open. Google
is just as open, only demanding reciprocity. So, potential change will result
is more openness, since Google is still open and just demanding those who use
the data to also be.

------
chapel
What is sad about Facebook not allowing users to export their contacts is that
they let advertisers and apps have access to your contacts without your
permission. I doubt Facebook will do anything about this, it would take their
users screaming for it.

------
staunch
Facebook could simply work around this. They don't have to use the official
API. They probably scrape for AOL/Yahoo/Hotmail. They can do it for Gmail too.
Then Google's only recourse would be to sue them. It'd be beautiful too
because then we'd get to see Facebook argue in favor of what it doesn't itself
allow.

~~~
abraham
AOL, Yahoo, and Hotmail all provide contact APIs. The amount of traffic
Facebook generates would be unmistakable and Google would just block them.

~~~
staunch
With a large and diverse enough IP address pool they could probably get around
being blocked. It might be cost prohibitive though.

~~~
awa
also illegal?

~~~
staunch
They could try calling a law enforcement agency claiming Facebook was hacking,
but a) they probably wouldn't do that b) the agency would probably tell them
it was a civil matter.

Much more likely that it would result in a lawsuit than handcuffs.

------
cletus
While I appreciate this move--Facebook is a silo and you need to be able to
get your data out--it's probably too little, too late.

Facebook has half a billion users and this mostly affects you when you sign
up. It feels like the ship has sailed.

Also, it'll need some other big players to adopt the same approach: Yahoo and
Microsoft for a start.

~~~
bbarthel
Except Microsoft and Yahoo already negotiated with Facebook for access to
their contacts:

"And it has also forged deals with both Hotmail and Yahoo that will let those
services access its contact data. Google didn’t do a partnership with
Facebook, so it doesn’t get the goods."

Which makes me more curious why Google did not negotiate a similar deal and
why they are trying to force the issue now.

------
dholowiski
While I don't agree with many of Facebook's privacy decisions, this seems
quite heavy handed on Google's side, to me. For google to say - if you use our
API, then these are the features you have to provide in your own API - I'm
sorry but who is Google to dictate what other companies do with their own
data? Who gets to decide what's "Substantially fast", or "Easy"? Google I
guess. How is this going to affect us - the small startups and independed
developers - what happens when our 'export contacts' function doesn't work
fast enough (at Google's sole discretion) and they shut down our access?
Sorry, but this sounds borderline evil (disguised as altruism) to me.

~~~
ori_b
Google has every right to determine what the price to use their data is. You
may not like it, but it's within their rights. To put it another way - What
right do you have to dictate under what terms Google shares their data?

And yes, this sort of thing is a risk you take when you start depending on a
third party that has no contractual obligations to you. If you don't like it,
don't depend on them - there are alternatives.

~~~
dholowiski
Just because they have the right to do it doesn't mean it's right to do it.
You don't see a problem with a gigantic company using their dominance to
dictate how other companies do business? When Microsoft did this, it was
called a Monopoly. Now when Google does this, it's 'liberation'?

~~~
eitland
Difference is, google gives the same rights to its users.

------
OoTheNigerian
My question is: Why did they wait until now?

~~~
halostatue
Negotiations for reciprocity probably failed.

------
pama
I like the spirit and educational value of this move. Doesn't this make it
difficult, however, for new developers to leverage google's contact data? Will
they have to go through an approval process?

------
mahmud
What would this mean for Facebook if Yahoo and MS followed suit?

------
callahad
> _"Facebook has never allowed users to export the contact information of
> their friends. This has been a gripe against the social network for years,
> because there’s never been an easy way to pick up and leave Facebook with
> your own data in tow."_

Isn't that factually incorrect? I seem to recall Facebook offering CSV exports
of friends' contact information from the very beginning, along with SVG graphs
of your social connections.

~~~
mithaler
Link please? If I'd known such a thing existed I'd have been using it years
ago.

The only way I know of to pull contact info from Facebook is to use my Droid's
excellent contact syncing, and even that's one-way and can't add any data to
my Google Contacts.

~~~
callahad
It was removed years ago, before Facebook was generally available outside of
Zuck-blessed institutions, but I definitely recall using it during the
2004-2005 academic year. I'm mainly contesting the absolute claim that
Facebook has _never_ allowed this.

------
biafra
Twitter and all the other services should do the same. Isn't fb the only big
social service that's not participating in open social?

------
greenlblue
Finally. Google is once again doing some good.

------
ChristianMarks
Wonderful. Now that corporations grok the idea of reciprocity--a difficult
thing to do because of the ingrained internalized tendency of people to submit
to unilateral corporate demands, it's time for individuals to demand the same
thing from content providers to whom they provide personal information.

------
varjag
> And, if it really came down to it, Facebook has one other way to get
> Google’s contact data. Google is going to still allow users to download
> their contacts in a spreadsheet — Facebook could simply ask users to upload
> that file.

Is he kidding?! Noone would bother with that.

------
temp0
Looks like the pimps are fighting over the data again.

------
chopsueyar
Is this socialist?

~~~
ChristianMarks
How could it possibly be socialist for Google not to agree to Facebook's
unilateral non-reciprocated use of Google's own social network data? Are you
saying that it's non-socialist only if Google simply hands their social
network over to Facebook user by user, because even the thought of non-
compliance with a corporate policy is necessarily socialist?

