What about users who want their tweets to be repeated? Politicians,
celebrities, product managers, and many others use Twitter as a
broadcast medium. You can argue that this is wrong, or that Twitter is
only for direct contact between one person and another, but that is
like saying paper was only
You can simply set your account to protected...
Tom
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 18, 2010, at 5:59 AM, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky
zn...@borasky-research.net wrote:
Quoting John Kalucki j...@twitter.com:
Every search engine, social network, blogging platform, content aggregator,
and to a
John,
I'm not sure how you draw that comparison. Google/Yahoo/Microsoft do
not sell the content of the sites that they index. Neither do
WordPress or Blogger sell the content of the blog posts. Facebook/Buzz
do not sell the content of people's status updates. They monetize
around the content,
I would like to know the answer to this as well. What will the limits
be on the statuses/filter?
On Nov 17, 9:44 am, Dewald Pretorius dpr...@gmail.com wrote:
Ryan,
The Gnip blog post states:
[QUOTE]Twitter Decahose. This volume-based product is comprised of 10%
of the full firehose.
We have every right in the world to gather this data for analysis
without
any permission. It's public.
No.
You don't get to compile posts from a discussion forum into a
product, under the idea that such posts are public domain.
They are not. - Unless you own the forum or have a deal with the
I don't care what your newsletter says. I'm talking about American law.
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 11:28 PM, L. Mohan Arun mar...@gmail.com wrote:
We have every right in the world to gather this data for analysis
without
any permission. It's public.
No.
You don't get to compile posts from a
Just to clarify. I never said they were Public Domain. Twitter or the user
own the copyrights. Probably both. I meant it has been made public
information, thereby granting some rights to those it was made public to. I
wouldn't have a right to redistribute a book written by you, but I have
every
I agree with blogging platforms and social networks but not the rest.
Being an owner of a website does not imply that I'm a Google user.
Nor is a musician a user of the used record store.
On Nov 17, 8:48 pm, John Kalucki j...@twitter.com wrote:
Every search engine, social network, blogging
The basic level of statuses/filter will remain unchanged
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 12:06 AM, Scott J sc...@globalizenetworks.com wrote:
I would like to know the answer to this as well. What will the limits
be on the statuses/filter?
On Nov 17, 9:44 am, Dewald Pretorius dpr...@gmail.com wrote:
Ryan,
The Gnip blog post states:
[QUOTE]Twitter Decahose. This volume-based product is comprised of 10%
of the full firehose. Starting today, developers who want to access
this sample rate will access it via Gnip instead of Twitter. Twitter
will also begin to transition non-display developers
Dewald,
The basic levels of all of the streaming APIs -- Spritzer, Follow,
Track -- will remain open, free and direct from us. Elevated levels
for non-display use will be served through Gnip.
Hope that answers the question.
Best, Ryan
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Dewald Pretorius
Ryan,
Thanks. Can I then suggest that you request Gnip to modify the
description of their Twitter Decahose feed. They refer to it as a
sample rate, which immediately creates confusion with your statuses/
sample.
On Nov 17, 2:09 pm, Ryan Sarver rsar...@twitter.com wrote:
Dewald,
The basic
Ryan, what about User Streams? I'm building something around User
Streams but it is a non-display analytics application. Am I at risk
for Twitter inserting another business into *my* data stream as well?
And I'm curious how some of the other Streaming consumers are going to
react to
Ryan:
Shannon raises a lot of great points, but I'd like to hear more about
the issue of reselling data derived from a purchased stream. Right now
the TOS says that you can't resell data from the API. I've been
telling clients that eventually Twitter will decide to make money from
the API, and
The minimum Gnip charge is $500 per month, with a minimum of a year
contract, if you want to use Gnip in a production application.
And that's before the -- still unknown -- additional access charges
for the Twitter feeds.
You can't use Gnip in a production application if you are not an
By the way, if you get Twitter data from Gnip, you are not bound to
the Twitter TOS. Your business and contractual relationship is with
Gnip, not Twitter.
On Nov 17, 3:28 pm, Dewald Pretorius dpr...@gmail.com wrote:
The minimum Gnip charge is $500 per month, with a minimum of a year
contract,
Dewald, I can't speak for Twitter, but I think you are missing the
path they seem to be building. As an independent developer you can
still use the streaming API at the default level of 400 keywords and
5,000 follows for free. That is plenty to get a site started or build
a proof of concept for a
I quite frankly don't see *any* economic value in a downsampled
Firehose. Why should *anyone* pay Gnip for 10% or 50% of the Firehose
when they can negotiated *directly* with Twitter for the whole Firehose?
--
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky
http://borasky-research.net http://twitter.com/znmeb
A
Adam, what I wrote was not a case for or against Gnip and/or Twitter
selling the stream through Gnip. I simply quoted Gnip prices and
conditions from the Gnip pricing page, because it is relevant to this
discussion.
This time I will venture further and say that I do not see where is
the value-add
Shannon, good questions -- answers inline below...
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 12:27 PM, Shannon Clark shannon.cl...@gmail.com wrote:
Looking at Gnip's website they have the contact us for pricing links -
will Twitter Gnip be making the pricing for the various levels public?
They will be
This deal with Gnip is all about *elevated access* you can build
whatever product you want (as long as it adheres to the Twitter API
Rules) with the basic APIs and basic levels of access.
As to the second part of your question we are setting the pricing as
to ensure that their sole position isn't
Adam, it's a good question and it really comes down to what you are
trying to re-sell.
Re-syndication or re-sale of the actual tweets is strictly prohibited
and won't change on our end. We are however, ok with reselling of data
that results from analysis of the Twitter API.
So a great example is
That's explicitly not true. You are bound by both the Twitter API
Rules and Gnip's TOS
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 1:31 PM, Dewald Pretorius dpr...@gmail.com wrote:
By the way, if you get Twitter data from Gnip, you are not bound to
the Twitter TOS. Your business and contractual relationship is
Ed, many developers don't want or can't afford the full Firehose. The
market for Gnip is very large based on the demand that we were unable
to serve.
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 2:04 PM, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky
zn...@borasky-research.net wrote:
I quite frankly don't see *any* economic value in a
Ryan,
Gnip will have to extend the Twitter API Rules into their TOS,
otherwise good luck with enforcing the Twitter API Rules if the stream
consumer has a contract only with Gnip.
Your answer about elevated access answers my question about value.
For completeness, here's what ReadWriteWeb says
Ryan, I understand. I'm just happy to see you help companies put a
real value on Twitter data in any form. And I'm happy to see Twitter
find new ways to make money. You'll never hear everything online must
be free from me. I go way back to when people paid for software, in
a box, in stores.
I'm
As a business model, is there another company that takes content,
which its users create and enter into the company's service with no
compensation, and then turns around and sells that content to third
parties, still with no compensation to the creators of the content?
I've been trying to think
Ryan,
What happens to users who are at 'restricted track' or 'partner track'
levels for streaming API access? Also, what is the time frame for moving
from twitter to Gnip and would twitter be contacting users who will no
longer be able to access Twitter API and refer them thru migration process?
Quoting Ryan Sarver rsar...@twitter.com:
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 12:27 PM, Shannon Clark
shannon.cl...@gmail.com wrote:
Will companies that license the data be allowed to, in turn, sell services
on top of that data - i.e. will this spark a new generation of products such
as Scout Labs (now
Just write your own massive dataset and filter our Twitters ads. On a
side note someone wrote about error 403 proxy. No you never need a
proxy, but use a proxy to circumvent the API sure awesome.
Best,
--
Edward H. Hotchkiss
http://www.edwardhotchkiss.com/
Every search engine, social network, blogging platform, content aggregator,
and to a certain extent, every used book store and used record store...
-John
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 1:04 PM, Dewald Pretorius dpr...@gmail.com wrote:
As a business model, is there another company that takes content,
Quoting John Kalucki j...@twitter.com:
Every search engine, social network, blogging platform, content aggregator,
and to a certain extent, every used book store and used record store...
Except that digital content producers can block search engines if it's
in their economic interests to do
32 matches
Mail list logo
