[meteorite-list] EBay analysis

From: Mark Miconi <mam602_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu Apr 22 10:28:37 2004
Message-ID: <010801c39fea$6de08460$d7e16a44_at_ph.cox.net>

Sterling,
Great piece...but you forgot one thing...Ebay gets paid for each transaction
that occurs and for every item listed...therefore it is reasonable that the
listing and transaction data at some level is recorded and retained for
their own income/tax purposes. At some level ebay has to be able to account
for every penny they make...they are afterall a "PUBLICLY HELD" company.
That alone makes every inch of their bookkeeping and what happens on their
site open to public scrutiny. Now I doubt they keep individual records of
every seller for listing fees, but at some level every penny they receive is
recorded and REPORTED. Ebay does not make all there money from auctions
either...they are a branded name and sell those rights, they allow third
party advertising and popups, and they want to sell their product as a whole
to investors/advertisers so you can bet that what happens on their venues is
collected, analyzed, manipulated, scraped and made available in many forms
and if they are smart they are charging for it to offset the cost of
producing that data.

I enjoyed reading your post...you made lots of good points.

Mark M.
----- Original Message -----
From: Sterling K. Webb <kelly_at_bhil.com>
To: <meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Cc: Jamie Stephens <j.stephens_at_morphism.com>; <LITIG8NSHARK@aol.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 6:03 PM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] EBay analysis


> This is a re-post of a message I sent yesterday. It never showed up
> on the List back to me. If you did get a copy, please delete, as it's
> the same. Sorry if I clutter your Inbox.
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I too am not-a-lawyer, but there are a couple of points worth
> considering.
>
> 1) eBay does indeed position itself as a "venue." It is the original
> primordial marketplace, where sellers from far-away lands spread their
> wares on
> their saddle blankets and wait for a buyer, so to speak, like the bazaar
> in
> Timbuctoo, brought to the Web.
> The WWW is a VERY PUBLIC PLACE. It was intended to be, continues to
> be, and
> (hopefully) will continue to be. Whether one comes to it as a business
> like eBay
> or as a private citizen, there is NO REASONABLE EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY
> for either
> party.
> To demonstrate that this is a fact one has only to consider that all
> transactions on the WWW which are desired to be PRIVATE are accomplished
> by
> secured documents, like when you dash off to PayPal to pay for that
> newly acquired
> treasure.
> There is no reasonable expectation of privacy and there is none
> (privacy, that
> is). Just as if you were walking down a major thoroughfare and someone
> pointed a
> camera at you. Is there anything you can do to prevent it? No. It's a
> public
> place.
>
> 2) eBay makes plentiful provision for anyone who truly desires
> privacy. Both
> sellers and buyers have user id's which could be kept completely
> isolated from
> their identities if the user wished it so. Very few do. A seller, for
> example, who
> has a catchy user id but also has prepared and presented an "About ME!"
> page which
> has their actual name, address, phone number, age, career highlights,
> hobbies and
> interests, and flattering photos, and which looks like a resume, can
> hardly
> protest that being publically observed is a violation of their privacy!
> All they
> are actually saying is that they wish to control their public relations,
> to have
> you know what they want to be known about them but nothing else, however
> public it
> may be. Doesn't work that way... in public.
>
> 3) Jamie refers to the data that eBay "keeps easily available," that
> is,
> transactions within the past thirty days but seems to believe that older
> data
> still exists. I suggest that he is mistaken in this and that the primary
> data of
> item sales is largely gone. eBay may store data back 90 days or even six
> months in
> some form, but I would be willing to bet that longterm data is not kept,
> nor is it
> legally required to be kept, as eBay only facilitates a transaction
> between other
> parties and does not conduct that transaction itself, as they take great
> pains to
> explain to the users. Does the man who rents the stalls in the bazaar
> keep track
> of every detail of a vendor's sales? Remember that eBay tells you if you
> want a
> record of a transaction, it is your responsibility to print it out,
> which implies
> the non-existence of any permanent record and their non-responsibility
> to provide
> one.
> And if it is true that eBay does not hold proprietary accumulated
> data of the
> sales, it follows that either they hold it to be of no worth or that
> they hold it
> to be strictly a matter between other parties. Either way, they cannot
> argue that
> they then have a compelling interest in it, its accumulation,
> dissemination, etc.,
> etc. eBay, after all, is not selling nor buying anything. They ask only
> to wet
> their beak as the goods and money are carried in and out of the
> marketplace.
>
> Apart from the technical means used to collect the data ("robots"),
> the only
> provision Jamie might have been considered to violate is number ii) in
> which the
> user promises not to "copy, reproduce, modify, create derivative works
> from,
> distribute or publicly display any content... from the Site."
> First, an analysis of transactions is NOT "content" unless you can
> point a
> browser toward an eBay page which shows the same thing. But there is no
> such page.
>
> Second, the terms "copy, reproduce, modify, or create derivative
> works"
> clearly means making a web page or document that LOOKS like an eBay page
> or as if
> it were a page whose source was eBay. The context clearly indicates that
> "look and
> feel" is what is meant.
> Third, eBay auction pages are accessible to both eBay users and
> non-users
> alike, but the agreement is binding ONLY on users, so if a non-user were
> to access
> the same pages and accumulate the same data, in other words, do the same
> thing as
> Jamie did, it would be...? What? Perfectly alright? Not covered by any
> rules?
> Legal as church on Sunday?
> So therefore, by eBay's own declaration, eBay pages for individual
> auctions
> are PUBLIC documents and the sales that take place therein are PUBLIC
> events. If
> they were not, they would be accessible only to users and only after a
> log in to
> the Site, which is not the case, of course.
> Only if the analysis were based on data taken from pages accessible
> only to
> registered users or to specific individual users could you maintain that
> no
> observer could report on what was to be found there. That would mean
> that no one
> could tell someone else about a weird item they saw on eBay. There could
> be no
> gushy news stories about the wonders of eBay. All mention or public
> discussion of
> a meteor-wrong on eBay would be "illegal." No one could laugh outloud at
> the
> individuals who offer their souls for sale on eBay. Absurd, of course.
>
> eBay is an excellent resource for market research, particularly for
> the market
> value of specific items. I have done such research (but not for
> meteorites) on
> eBay data. Being an old-fashioned sort, I used no robots except for my
> two
> keyboard fingers and I recorded the results in notebooks in pencil (not
> very
> cyber, I know). I am only following the same procedure that I would if I
> attended
> actual physical auctions (which I do). Just as anybody (and everybody)
> who lives
> by trading would do and does do. How else would I know the market price,
> and more
> importantly the price trends, of glass doorknobs, Weller pottery, Daion
> guitars,
> and dozens if not hundreds of other odd objects? And I intend to keep
> right on
> doing it. I'm just not talking...
>
>
> Sterling K. Webb
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------
>
> Jamie Stephens wrote:
>
> > Listees,
> >
> > I'm gonna suspend any more preliminary analysis publishing.
> > I've already started a discussion with EBay. Meanwhile, I'm
> > gonna continue experimenting with the analysis. If/when I
> > publish any more data, I'll obfuscate identities as I
> > described previously. Probably most of the interesting
> > analysis doesn't require identities anyway:
> >
> > Number of new bidders by week
> > Number of new sellers by week
> > Total items, dollars sold by week
> > Distribution of prices by week
> >
> > Any debate over those stats?
> >
> > All of that data is now trivial to obtain (as the raw data
> > accumulates). It'll be fun to see the EBay meteorite market
> > trends in an objective and comprehensive way. Please stay
> > tuned.
> >
> > This thread has evoled to non-meteoritical topics. Skip
> > the rest if you're interested in meteorite stuff only.
> >
> > Paul,
> >
> > Very nice discussion.
> >
> > Yeah, when I said server load was EBay's "primary" concern,
> > I meant -- but did not write -- in the context of my specific
> > robot. For various reasons, I'd argue that it does not
> > consitute a derivate work or otherwise challenges EBay's
> > expressed concerns (not even privacy as discussed in their
> > text). Here are the numbered items from the EBay paragraph
> > you cite:
> >
> > (i) My stated "primary" concern; #1 on their list as well.
> > (ii) There are lots of cases dealing with these terms.
> > Is the fact that X bought Y from Z for $N enforceable
> > "content"? Elsewhere EBay goes to trouble to position
> > itself as a "venue". Interesting. All arguable --
> > but not by me now.
> > (iii) No interference with the site.
> > (iv) No bypass of robot exclusions.
> >
> > That said, my (experimental) robot is probably in violation of
> > EBay's User Agreement simply because the agreement prohibits
> > all robots. No need to research it, Mike. Whether the
> > agreement and other EBay statements would withstand challenges
> > from a system like mine is a different matter -- one I'm not
> > interested in pursuing. I'm asking permission.
> >
> > Aside: EBay's robot prohibition is muddled. They do allow
> > for some "automated means" (e.g., auction and bidding tools).
> > Also note
> >
> > http://www.ebay.com/robots.txt
> >
> > which, incidently, does not restrict the pages I use. Why not?
> >
> > BTW, my background includes lots of large-scale data integration
> > work. Also I have fair amount of experience in intellectual
> > property licensing (including user agreements); patent
> > prosecution, infringement, and licensing; and other IP-related
> > activities. But, as I frequently say in this context, IANAL.
> > (I Am Not A Lawyer.) I do hang out with them a fair amount.
> > At Christmas, they send me gifts, which I fear they bought with
> > my money.
> >
> > Thanks for the feedback, Paul.
> >
> > --Jamie
> >
> > LITIG8NSHARK_at_aol.com wrote:
> >
> > > Good day Folks,
> > >
> > > I have been following the thread about the compilation of statistical
> > > information regarding the sales/purchases of meteorites on eBay.
> > > Personally, I found the compilation both interesting and informative
and
> > > I have no objection to having been included in the published
compilation.
> > >
> > > That having being said, I'd like to preface the following by stating
> > > that while I am by no means an expert in "cyber law", I am an
attorney.
> > > I must admit that when "robots" were mentioned in a recent post to the
> > > list I had to do some research to try and figure out exactly what a
> > > robot was and what it did. I don't claim to be a computer
> > > programer/analyst either. Now that I have a rough idea what a "robot"
> > > is and what it does I'd like to share some of my thoughts regarding
the
> > > compilation of statistical information from eBay.
> > >
> > > I accessed eBay's policy regarding the use of robots on it's site. I
> > > agree with one writer's proposition that one of the reasons eBay
> > > prohibits robots from accessing its site, in some circumstances, is to
> > > prevent a drain on its server. However, I can't entirely agree that
> > > that is eBay's primary goal. In October 1997, eBay was involved in a
> > > serious dispute with Onsale, a competitor, over Onsale's use of a
robot
> > > program to harvest the email addresses of eBay users. (Note that in
1997
> > > eBay made it much easier than it is today to access the email
addresses
> > > of members.) I suspect that it was subsequent to this dispute that
eBay
> > > placed in its User Policy the prohibition against use of robots,
spiders
> > > etc. It would appear that eBay is also interested in protecting
itself
> > > from what it views as unfair competition.
> > >
> > > As can seen below in a paste of the pertinent part of eBay's user
policy
> > > regarding *Access and Interference*, the use of robots is clearly
> > > prohibited absent express written permission from eBay. The policy
> > > language goes further in requiring that, even _with_ eBay's express
> > > written permission to use a robot for the creation of a derivative
work
> > > (compilation of statistical information) on any other member other
than
> > > yourself, you are obligated to obtain the express written permission
of
> > > the "third party," which I interpret to mean the party who's
information
> > > you are seeking to compile. This, I believe, is intended, at least in
> > > part, to provide for some level of privacy for eBay members.
> > >
> > > From a strict reading of eBay's policy language one could reasonably
> > > infer that it is not only the public dissemination of the compilation
of
> > > statistical information that is being prohibited, absent the required
> > > express written permission of eBay and the third party affected, but
> > > *also* the private (unpublished) compilation itself. However, I sense
> > > that the prohibition of the compilation of statistical information for
> > > the /purely private use/ of the compiler might not be enforceable in
> > > court and might be attacked as being vague and overbroad given that
> > > eBay's software actually provides tools that allow for the compilation
> > > of such information. Granted, without the use of a robot program the
> > > compilation would be very time consuming, if not entirely impractical.
> > >
> > > Finally, putting aside any legal implications (as far as eBay is
> > > concerned) of compiling statistical information about eBay members,
the
> > > publication of such information has the potential for what some might
> > > consider abuse. As an example, because the sale of items may have tax
> > > consequences for a seller in some countries, I can imagine a scenario
> > > where one disgruntled member might use, or threaten to use, the
compiled
> > > information to the detriment of another member.
> > >
> > > Just a thought.
> > >
> > > *The preceding has not been intended to provide legal advise regarding
> > > the compilation of statistical information from eBay resources. It
has
> > > simply been my thoughts and personal opinions. Should you have
specific
> > > questions along this line you should consult with an expert in "cyber
law".*
> > >
> > > Have a great day All.
> > >
> > > Best Regards,
> > >
> > > Paul
> > >
> > >
> > > **
> > > *Access and Interference*.
> > > The Site contains robot exclusion headers. Much of the information on
> > > the Site is updated on a real time basis and is proprietary or is
> > > licensed to eBay by our users or third parties. You agree that you
will
> > > not use any robot, spider, scraper or other automated means to access
> > > the Site for any purpose without our express written permission.
> > > Additionally, you agree that you will not: (i) take any action that
> > > imposes, or may impose in our sole discretion an unreasonable or
> > > disproportionately large load on our infrastructure; (ii) copy,
> > > reproduce, modify, create derivative works from, distribute or
publicly
> > > display any content (except for Your Information) from the Site
without
> > > the prior expressed written permission of eBay and the appropriate
third
> > > party, as applicable; (iii) interfere or attempt to interfere with the
> > > proper working of the Site or any activities conducted on the Site; or
> > > (iv) bypass our robot exclusion headers or other measures we may use
to
> > > prevent or restrict access to the Site.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ______________________________________________
> > Meteorite-list mailing list
> > Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
> > http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
> ______________________________________________
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
> http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Received on Fri 31 Oct 2003 03:06:10 PM PST


Help support this free mailing list:



StumbleUpon
del.icio.us
reddit
Yahoo MyWeb