Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Amazon Sues Alexaholic

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the at-last-it's-time dept.

theodp writes "ZDNet reports that as Jeff Bezos tap-danced out of a cringe moment at Web 2.0 Expo prompted by Tim O'Reilly's questioning of why Amazon couldn't get along with Alexaholic (now Statsaholic), Amazon had already filed a lawsuit to legally spank the tiny company into oblivion."

16 of 124 comments (clear)

  1. another GoogleClick moment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Another generation learns the old truth... the upstarts always seem to start as the Good Guys taking on the Big Faceless Corporate Machines. Their CEOs are hip and appear smiling, sharp but casually dressed, on magazine covers. Even after they go public, they maintain that halo for awhile, give lip service to idea of making the world a better place instead of just making a buck. Why not make a little less, and give something back to the people?

    Then one day, the upstarts turn into the Big Bad Guys. There's just no way to tell the difference. The need to dominate the industry is overriding, and the end justifies every means.

  2. Reasons to like Alexa? by drgonzo59 · · Score: 4, Informative
    From an excerpt in the article titled "Reasons to like Alexa" a response to the claim that Alexa's data is not representative was Statistical significance is attainable with only a small subset of the population - ask a pollster or a high school math teacher..

    That is a mistake, or rather a mistaken response to the claim. Yes, statistical significance is attainable but only if the sample is representative (i.e.) is random. The critics' claim is that Alexa's data is not representative, in other words the sites that choose to give Alexa their data are somehow don't represent a random sample of all the websites out there. It isn't a question of size but rather of quality.

    1. Re:Reasons to like Alexa? by Assassin+bug · · Score: 3, Informative

      True, representation is reliant on how the samples are obtained and the response variable used for the estimate. However, representation and the randomness of the data are not necessarily related. There are different "kinds" of random-sampling techniques (e.g., systematic or arbitrary). Also, the data itself has its own measure of randomness. You can have a non-random, representative data set. You can even have non-random data with heterogenious variance and have it be representative. What matters, in statistics, is that the assumptions for whatever statistical test is used are checked and that corrections to the analysis are made to accomodate for violations of the assumptions.

    2. Re:Reasons to like Alexa? by suv4x4 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes, statistical significance is attainable but only if the sample is representative (i.e.) is random.

      Actually "random" would be the opposite of "representative", as long as statistics are concerned. Represenative means the same proportions of the subgroups in the samples are the same as the whole. The subgroups should be carefully chosen to represent properly what could bias or change the outcome of the results.

      As an extremely simple example, you want in the sample to have the same proportions of age, gender, income, professions etc (some of those categories may not matter in certain studies).

  3. Everbody loses?? by iminplaya · · Score: 3, Funny

    The folks at Dewey, Cheatham, and Howe beg to differ.

    --
    What?
  4. Re:Thanks Tim by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I think it's kind of funny that O'Reilly was complaining about Alexa/Alexaholic when O'Reilly and Associates basically trademarked "Web 2.0" and sued anyone else that used "Web 2.0" in connection with a conference or convention.

  5. The problem with Statsaholic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    It has been shown in multiple studies that statsahol use is a gateway to statsajuana and statsamphetamine. Good for Bezos!

  6. data != articles by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 3, Insightful

    At least according to US copyright law, raw data does not contain the expressive component necessary for copyrights.

    From the complaint:
    "Alexa seeks to force Mr. Hornbaker to stop infringing Alexa's trademarks and to stop pirating Alexa proprietary data."

    I don't know exactly what Alexa does, but the only thing protectable in a database is its *design and *structure -- and that only if those attributes exhibit creativity (rather than the ordinary constraints of the relational model).

    --
    My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
  7. Re:Thanks Tim by Shemmie · · Score: 5, Informative

    http://www.tomrafteryit.net/oreilly-trademarks-web -20-and-sets-lawyers-on-itcork/

    I seem to remember hearing this, way back when.

  8. Re:I'm not surprised... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Alan Graham here...I'll answer you...since you actually don't get the thrust of the piece.

    It smells bad to have someone from a $16 billion dollar company pitch to an audience of web 2.0 developers about how you can trust them with your business and pretend to be a good steward of what web 2.0 stands for...while you're suing one guy for upwards of $500k...especially when you had a year to shut him down and you only did that after you took all his ideas. On top of that you operate a company that would not exist without the volunteer efforts of every single person who installs the Alexa toolbar and reports that data back to the company...and they even admit...no data/volunteers...no Alexa.

    What I expect Alexa to do is to find it in themselves to work with the community that they depend on...in a more open way. I have nothing against them making a buck...but this type of lawsuit is heavy handed.

  9. Re:Thanks Tim by maxume · · Score: 4, Informative

    http://www.tomrafteryit.net/sorry-tim/

    In short, O'Reilly is partnered with CMP and CMP has the mark and sent the letter.

    --
    Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  10. Re:Amazon's shame by ebuck · · Score: 4, Funny

    You only used one click to submit your comment, so GO SUE YOURSELF!

  11. Re:Thanks Tim by Kalriath · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Here's the trademark registration: http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=m kfu1u.3.3 Here's an actual instance of CMP/O'reilly threatening a (not even US-based!) non-profit for using it: http://www.tomrafteryit.net/oreilly-trademarks-web -20-and-sets-lawyers-on-itcork/

    --
    For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
  12. He was screen scraping... by xENoLocO · · Score: 3, Informative

    ...not using the APIs.

    He was "avoiding an API fee", but the data he wanted was not available through the API anyways, so he screen scraped alexa. If alexa had wanted that data available they would have made it available through the API.

    The guy (hornbaker) admittedly says he wants to turn this into a PR battle. And I remember him explicitly trying to stick it to amazon before he changed the site name.

    I don't really know who the hell to cheer for here, so I'm just gonna sit back and watch.

    --
    "The need to build the internet comes from something inside us, something programmed... something we can't resist."
    1. Re:He was screen scraping... by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If alexa had wanted that data available they would have made it available through the API.

      But if they HADN'T wanted that data available, there wouldn't exist a URL through which anybody could access it.

  13. Turn the tables by mrbluze · · Score: 4, Funny

    I must admit I did read "Amazon Sues Sexaholic" first time round. But what if we turned the tables around..

    Sexaholics Sue Amazon

    That would be one classy action suit!

    --
    Do it yourself, because no one else will do it yourself. [beta blockade 10-17 Feb]