rss rss rss
  • Home
  • About
  • Contact Us
  • Submission Policy
  • Back Issue Archives
  • Editors and Staff
  • Alumni
cl-war-not-peace
Computers, Internet, Technology // Oct. 09, 2012 // by Rowena Dungca // 0 Comments

Craigslist: Are We Looking at the Newest “Internet Bully”?

Craig Newmark probably did not anticipate the significance of his innovation when he first launched Craigslist back in 1985 as an email distribution listing.  Over the years, the company has grown and as expected, so did competition.  However, compared to the “high-tech” sites that we see nowadays, Craigslist seems to be stuck in the prehistoric era.  The layout is dated, the site is jam-packed with information and everyone is convinced that it’s time to update the vintage look of the site.  “Craigslist has become stagnant,” wrote Nick Bilton from the New York Times.  These deficiencies sparked an interest in competitors to develop something more efficient and user-friendly than Craigslist’s indexing services.  Unfortunately, instead of making the necessary improvements on their site, Craigslist allegedly invests a lot of its resources in policing potential competitors by sending them cease and desist letters once they’ve launched any type of potentially competing product.  3taps, a company that gathers information from search engines about Craigslist listings, became one of its most recent targets.  Craigslist filed a lawsuit against 3taps, accusing the latter of copyright infringement due to “scraping” of content from Craigslist, and trademark infringement due to the allegedly unauthorized use of their registered mark.  Unlike other companies, 3taps refused to give in to the online classified ads giant.  On September 24, 3taps filed its answer to the claims, rejecting all allegations, and brought counterclaims, accusing Craigslist of copyright misuse and antitrust violation.

Copyright Misuse
In its response, 3taps based its counterclaim of copyright misuse on three factors.  First, it claims that Craigslist’s asserted copyright is invalid because the site’s content “is factual data that cannot be subject to any copyright protection”.  Second, it argued that Craigslist lacked standing because it is “not the owner or exclusive licensee of users’ original postings”.  Lastly, 3taps claimed that they did not get any information directly from Craigslist but instead, they collected information from search engines that cached them.  Thus, according to 3taps, the allegedly “scraped” information is in the public domain and does not fall within the scope of copyright protection. The second argument, however, would depend on Craigslist’s terms of use on the date of filing. 3taps alleged that Craigslist amended its terms of use shortly after the filing, requiring users to grant Craigslist an exclusive license on their postings.  At first glance, this seems like a classic case of copyright misuse because courts have frequently held that factual listings are outside the scope of copyright protection. However, there are no specific guidelines on copyright misuse which makes it difficult to assess whether or not this counterclaim could be successful.

Antitrust Violation
3taps claimed that Craigslist’s “sham cease and desist letters and sham lawsuits” violate Section 2 of the Sherman Act because they enable Craigslist to extend its monopoly in at least three markets – for real-time search, indexing and onboarding.  In its counterclaim, 3taps accused Craigslist of maintaining or extending its monopoly power not through innovation but rather through “intentional, exclusionary conduct in connection with its anticompetitive scheme”.  Through this power, Craigslist has the ability to control pricing and create additional barriers to entry against potential competitors, thus, stifling innovation as well as competition.  As proof of anticompetitive effects in the relevant market, 3taps argued that after Craigslist filed the lawsuit against it, some of its search engine partners (Invatory, forsale-alert.com, HuntSmartly, Tempest, jumpoffcampus.com, wishcan.com, list-alert.com and SnapStore) have backed down which again enabled Craigslist to lessen competition.  3taps’ site called “craiggers” which was the subject of the trademark infringement claim had to be shut down as well, adding to the damages allegedly suffered by 3taps.

Effect on Consumers
Apart from potential competitors, consumers could also find themselves at the losing end.  Frivolous lawsuits could scare away competitors and make them think twice before making any significant investment in the creation of new products, such as a more efficient indexing search engine.  Further, with less competition, consumers are left with fewer options and mediocre quality of products, a scenario that is not consistent with neither antitrust nor intellectual property law principles.  If the court decides in favor of 3taps, we could soon be seeing a superior product to that of Craigslist’s but if Craigslist wins the suit, there would be less incentive for it to improve its services.  We would then have to brace ourselves for probably another decade of prehistoric classified ads search.

Written by: Rowena Dungca

 

Rowena Dungca is a Master of Laws (LLM) student in the Intellectual Property and Information Technology Law program at Fordham. She received her law degree from the University of Vienna and worked as an associate in Austria before coming to New York. She runs three blogs of her own and loves to write just about anything – parenting woes, best diaper deals, immigrants’ rights and, of course, Apple’s never ending tale of lawsuits.

Leave Your Response

The IPLJ Blog. Brought to you by:

Fordham University School of Law's Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal

Search by Tag

Archives

  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • August 2007
  • April 2007

Fordham University Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal BLOG

IPLJ Editor-In-Chief:
Ryan Fox

IPLJ Managing Editor:
Tiffany Miao

IPLJ Technology & Blog Editor:
Patricia Chang

Blogroll

man-question-mark-238x300

Federal Circuit Still Confused Over Software Patents

Jun. 05, 2013 // 0 Comments

In an en banc decision, the Federal...

Apple Samsung

ITC Bans Sales of Older Apple Products

Jun. 05, 2013 // 0 Comments

The International Trade Commission has banned the...

SDNY Rules Digital Music NOT Subject to First Sale Doctrine

Apr. 25, 2013 // 0 Comments

Judge Richard J. Sullivan granted plaintiff Capitol...

shakiradelarua

Legal Woes for Colombian Popstar Shakira Ignite

Apr. 24, 2013 // 0 Comments

Internationally known singer Shakira is facing a...

twitterbird

Hashtag Tweet About It: Twitter Finally Gets a #Patent

Apr. 20, 2013 // 0 Comments

After years of patent pending actions for...

com

The Future of “.com”

Apr. 17, 2013 // 0 Comments

Following ICANN’s 46th meeting in Beijing, the President...

EuroPatent

The European Court of Justice Dismisses Actions Against the Single European Patent

Apr. 16, 2013 // 0 Comments

In 2011, the European Council authorized enhanced...

twitter2

Hiding Behind a Hashtag: #hatespeech or #freespeech

Apr. 13, 2013 // 0 Comments

Twitter is being sued in a French...

SME_innovation

Innovation in China

Apr. 12, 2013 // 0 Comments

In this South China Morning Post article, Benjamin...

Facebook-Lawsuit

Timeline Trademark Tiff

Apr. 10, 2013 // 0 Comments

Facebook Inc. is embroiled in a legal...

Journal Updates

yoga

Article by IPLJ’s Senior Articles Editor Published!

Apr. 23, 2013 // 0 Comments

“Stretching Copyright to its Limit,” an article...

2013-Cultural-Heritage-Law-Panel-email

Art Law Panel Discussion: April 10, 2013, 7:30PM

Apr. 04, 2013 // 0 Comments

Please join us on April 10, 2013...

jackford

“Trials of The Century: Media and the Law” with Jack Ford: March 18, 2013, 4PM

Mar. 05, 2013 // 0 Comments

We here at IPLJ invite you to...

volume

Go, Little Book!

Jan. 10, 2013 // 0 Comments

Well, maybe not so little.  We’re thrilled...

law360

IPLJ Symposium Mentioned on Law360.com!

Nov. 15, 2012 // 0 Comments

Our sincere thanks to all of those...

cite

Big week for IPLJ’s Symposium Editor!

Nov. 08, 2012 // 0 Comments

A Volume XXII note written by IPLJ’s...

IP

November 9, 2012: IPLJ Symposium

Oct. 10, 2012 // 1 Comments

Please join us on Friday, November 9,...

hollywood

Fordham Law Named One of America’s Top 10 Entertainment Law Schools!

Jul. 20, 2012 // 0 Comments

We here at IPLJ are so proud...

4

Hello, Book 4!

Jul. 02, 2012 // 0 Comments

We are so pleased to share Book...

3

Book 3 Is Complete!

Apr. 27, 2012 // 0 Comments

We here at IPLJ are so happy...

Categories

  • Apple
  • Art
  • Biotech
  • Blogroll
  • Books
  • Broadway
  • Celebrity
  • Cell Phones
  • Censorship
  • Communications Law
  • Computers
  • Congress
  • Copyright
  • Counterfeit
  • Design
  • DMCA
  • Doh!
  • Entertainment
  • Facebook
  • Fashion
  • First Amendment
  • Fourth Amendment
  • FSLF
  • General
  • Google
  • International IP Law
  • Internet
  • Journal Updates
  • Major League Baseball
  • Microsoft
  • Movies
  • Music
  • National Football League
  • NBA
  • NCAA
  • New York
  • News
  • Patents
  • Piracy
  • Plagiarism
  • Privacy
  • Royalties
  • Social Media
  • Sports
  • Startup
  • Surveillance
  • Technology
  • Television
  • Trade Secret
  • Trademark
  • Trolls
  • Twitter
  • United States Supreme Court
  • Video Games

Recent Posts

  • Supreme Court Rules on Reverse Payment Settlements
  • Isolated Genes are Patent-Ineligible, Apparently
  • The Trouble with Seeds
  • Federal Circuit Still Confused Over Software Patents
  • ITC Bans Sales of Older Apple Products

Admin

  • Log in
  • Entries RSS
  • Comments RSS
  • WordPress.org

The IPLJ

The Fordham Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal is one of the leading scholarly law journals dedicated to the publication of Articles, Essays, Comments, Addresses, and Notes on intellectual property, media, and entertainment law.

The Blog is the Journal's online counterpart. This Blog strives to present the most up-to-date intellectual property, media, sports, art, and entertainment law news and issues... and then some. We at the IPLJ find this ever-changing field fascinating and relevant. We hope you find this Blog to be the same.

  • © Copyright IPLJ / All Rights Reserved.
  • Premium WordPress Themes / Theme by wpStyles.org