On 1/30/07, Bill Cammack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I don't know about your feedburner point, but I'll take your word for > it. The only reasons I got involved with feedburner was to format my > feed to go to iTunes and for (24-hour after the fact) stats. > > That's a great point you have about iTunes! :D I hadn't ever > considered, and probably wouldn't ever have considered that someone > else might go around making accounts for blog feeds they don't own in > iTunes, MeFeedia, Fireant... whatever. You're absolutely right. > > It's not like Technorati, which requires you to prove that you own a > site before they'll mark you as the site owner. As unlikely as I > consider the situation to be, it's absolutely true that someone, > anyone... could submit a feed to iTunes without the site owner's > knowledge, necessarily making iTunes an aggregator, even if it's an > unwitting participant in someone else's plan. > > Of course, if other people can post your blog to iTunes, Apple can > post your blog to iTunes, which would put them in the same boat as > "the usual suspects". :D
I'm not talking about people "claiming your feed" or doing anything wrong or underhanded at all. All I'm saying is that if I wanted to subscribe to your feed I'd rake your RSS feed and subscribe to it in itunes... thereby your media would be IN itunes... getting aggregated by itunes. Nothing wrong with that... that's what iTunes was MADE to do. The same goes for Bloglines, Google newsreader, Mefeedia and others. The point is 1) ALL of these are aggregators, though some are software and some are webservices 2) NONE of them are opt-in, indeed NONE of them could functin if they were opt-in. 3) ALL of them except iTunes respect the unwritten etiquette of including a link in the interface BACK to the original blog post -Mike > -- > Bill C. > http://ems.blip.tv > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >
