Robin Wauters is currently staff writer for TechCrunch and lead editor of Virtualization.com. In addition to its activities, professional blogging, he is an entrepreneur, the organizer of the event, from time to time the Council consultant and an angel investor, but the most important champion of the full launch. He lives and works in Belgium, a small country in Europe. He can often be found work from their home or ... ? Read More
Facebook made some notable changes its policy platform 27 July 2011, adding a couple new terms developers need to be taken into account when creating applications for Facebook platform. Facebook does not seem to have brought these changes on the blog coverage of its developer or forum as far as I can tell, and amazingly, no one seems to have noticed the policy updates nor (per eagle-eyed blogger exception).
Here are two items that were added to the policy:
I. 10. applications can reward users with virtual currency or virtual goods in exchange for actions that do not involve third parties, but is offering a reward for user actions, including third parties shall be supplied from Facebook credits through the integration of Facebook credits.
For example, you can reward users with virtual currency or virtual goods in exchange for any action, in which personally identifiable information with third parties, you can reward users with virtual currency or virtual goods in exchange for a third party, such as toolbars or melody, and you can reward users with virtual currency for engaging in passive actionsare offered by third storonamiNaprimer, watch videos, play mini-games, or taking the poll. "
This is another step towards Facebook credits make application developers who can now no longer provide users with virtual currency in exchange for games, participate in a survey or watch the video provided by a third party. Some will inevitably rule the cry, but I think it's reasonable for a new term.
But more interesting is this one:
I. 11. Apps on Facebook could not integrate, promote, distribute, or redirect any app on the competing social platforms ".
Read that again. Facebook said that any application that runs on it's platform integration reference is prohibited or in any way linked any app on any competing social platform.
For the record that, in accordance with Facebook's advertising guidelines, which state that ads for competing products or services will be rejected. In my opinion there is a difference though.
Needless to say, this seems very broad, which could potentially affect the legions of applications that redirect or in any other way of links to sites such as Twitter, Google, hi5, Flickr, Foursquare, and numerous other social network services.
It may not be Facebook's intention to go after them, but the wording of the new terms of the policy framework should be of some concern to a number of application developers. For what it's worth, Facebook says that it does not prohibit any applications based on new conditions to date.
There is, however, at least the whiff of antikonkurenciû related to the new conditions.
The representative of the Facebook argues:
"Like many companies, we have policies that prohibit apps from user guides for applications for competing social platform. We recently updated the policy to make sure they're clear to developers, based on our platform. "
For what it's worth, I disagree with the Facebook policy is clear or standard, nor do I think, developers are actually aware of updates that have been made. I am also having problems, understand why Facebook chose not to report changes in politics through his developer blog or Forum, given the breadth of its third-party developer ecosystem and the feelings that come with such changes. They should about it now.
What is the last policy platform means for applications that link to a separate Web site or Web application – for example, Twitter.com – remains quite unclear, too. Obviously the new conditions limit the developers from references in no way platforms that compete with Facebook in the social network service.
But, for example, the difficulty of determining what is allowed and what isn't, and it remains to be seen if Facebook is to refrain from prohibiting apps from competitors for the violation of a rule.
Make of it what you will, but that's what Alex St. John, President and CTO of hi5 networks, talk about new terms in the Facebook platform policy in recent email:
"They are absolutely terrified of other networks like hi5, Google + WildTangent and does a better job of building a social graph, entertaining their audience and make more money from our users!
They do not give developers the ability to grow the audience for their games outside of Facebook. "And this mention of Facebook credits clearly shows how terrifying they other platforms, such as SocioPay, being able to better than them to monetize their audience."
Advertising links in the above quote aside, I also believe that Facebook updated their policies for fear of its competition, as a defensive measure against rivals such as Google and Twitter.
We contacted Google and Twitter to find out how they interpret Facebook recently made a change in policy. Google spokesman declined to comment on – we still expect to hear from Twitter.
In related news, Facebook just banned rival Netlog from its platform for violations (other) policies.
(Thanks to my wonderful with Blogger Jason Kincaid for assistance-though I would be happy to consider full credit for phenomenal image at top)
Also read:
Google + puts Facebook on the defensive? (August 2011)
Google + Ad on Facebook banned (July 2011)
AD .LY against Facebook: something doesn't add up (April 2011)
Facebook is the largest social network in the world, with more than 500 million users. Mark Zuckerberg founded Facebook in February 2004, originally as an exclusive network for students at Harvard University. He ...
Read More
No comments:
Post a Comment