The point is that, due to network effects and first-mover advantage, it's way harder to displace craigslist than building a better product.
Now, that's not illegal on craig/craigslist's part, but he can either be an openness-advocating philanthropreneur, as he tends to brand himself, or he can be a lockdown value extractor with a legal team, as it seems they're on their way to becoming. Can't be both.
> Now, that's not illegal on craig/craigslist's part, but he can either be an openness-advocating philanthropreneur, as he tends to brand himself, or he can be a lockdown value extractor with a legal team, as it seems they're on their way to becoming. Can't be both.
So say The Police Of Moral Rectitude? I don't really see the point here. Craigslist isn't actively harming the industry, they're just running their own businesses. How they choose to do so is their own concern, and they have no obligation to give their business away to people that want to replace them.
Oh, boo hoo! He did the hard work. He earned the first mover advantage. Go be disruptive without being a thief. Make a compelling product that steals his users, not his data.
Now, that's not illegal on craig/craigslist's part, but he can either be an openness-advocating philanthropreneur, as he tends to brand himself, or he can be a lockdown value extractor with a legal team, as it seems they're on their way to becoming. Can't be both.