Well, Winerized and Scoblized in one day. And many emails, some from subscribers, some not.
To clarify and answer some FAQs on my post below:
1. This was not an attack on RSS or full-text aggregators as a class. My concern is with a specific type of unauthorized commercial use of my feed.
2. It’s not so much the stripping of the frame thing that bothers me – it’s the prospect of:
Creating the free content for advertisements that Bloglines will sell to other trademark law firms. This isn’t baseless conjecture – read this discusssion of Bloglines’ plans for advertising keyed to the content of blogs. At least with Google’s contextual ad program, the blog creator gets some money.
Bloglines is also accumulating and possibly selling a list of my subscribers without so much as a hello, how are you, may we do this? My decision to remove my site, viewed as rash by some, was triggered as much as what I viewed as the disingenuous nature of the response I received from Blogline when I wrote them.
That bothers me more than the frame stripping. I know that other RSS readers frame strip.
3. “If he doesn’t like this, then he shouldn’t make a RSS Feed available.”
Can I record NBC TV’s VHF broadcast and re-distribute the feed inserting my own paid advertisements? If NBC doesn’t like it, then it shouldn’t broadcast over the air.
4. Legally, this is not a close case. The content is copyrightable. This blog is published pursuant to a NON-COMMERCIAL USE LICENSE. Selling lists of my subscribers and running advertising would be commercial.
5. Having said that – let’s discuss what is a fair RSS environment. I’m well aware that full-text aggregators is a preferred means of reading blog content and Blogline’s market share indicates that many prefer the web-based approach.
But the number of posts and emails that said “how can he lose 190 readers like that? is he crazy?” suggests a fear and a perception that a model where no blogger has control over the commercial re-use of their feed is the only model – and that’s unfair and plain wrong.