<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:creativeCommons="http://backend.userland.com/creativeCommonsRssModule"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: VRM and the Four Party System</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/2009/04/12/vrm-and-the-four-party-system/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/2009/04/12/vrm-and-the-four-party-system/</link>
	<description>Developing tools for customer independence and engagement with vendors</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:08:07 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Doc Searls Weblog &#183; Whose Side(wiki) Are You On?</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/2009/04/12/vrm-and-the-four-party-system/comment-page-1/#comment-17161</link>
		<dc:creator>Doc Searls Weblog &#183; Whose Side(wiki) Are You On?</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Oct 2009 16:14:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/?p=105#comment-17161</guid>
		<description>[...] VRM and the Four Party System, by yours truly. Is Sidewiki a fourth party service? Let&#8217;s bring it up at the workshop. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] VRM and the Four Party System, by yours truly. Is Sidewiki a fourth party service? Let&#8217;s bring it up at the workshop. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ProjectVRM Blog &#187; Is RedBeacon VRM?</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/2009/04/12/vrm-and-the-four-party-system/comment-page-1/#comment-17091</link>
		<dc:creator>ProjectVRM Blog &#187; Is RedBeacon VRM?</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2009 14:22:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/?p=105#comment-17091</guid>
		<description>[...] Is that VRM? In a number of ways, yes. RedBeacon to me looks like a fourth party service, such as those outlined in VRM and the Four Party System. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Is that VRM? In a number of ways, yes. RedBeacon to me looks like a fourth party service, such as those outlined in VRM and the Four Party System. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Doc Searls Weblog &#183; Primary needs for political tools</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/2009/04/12/vrm-and-the-four-party-system/comment-page-1/#comment-17082</link>
		<dc:creator>Doc Searls Weblog &#183; Primary needs for political tools</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Sep 2009 20:08:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/?p=105#comment-17082</guid>
		<description>[...] pioneers as a fourth party service.Follow that link for more on what I mean by that; or check out Joe Andrieu&#8217;s series [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] pioneers as a fourth party service.Follow that link for more on what I mean by that; or check out Joe Andrieu&#8217;s series [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ProjectVRM Blog &#187; Adjusting Business to a Networked World</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/2009/04/12/vrm-and-the-four-party-system/comment-page-1/#comment-16140</link>
		<dc:creator>ProjectVRM Blog &#187; Adjusting Business to a Networked World</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:17:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/?p=105#comment-16140</guid>
		<description>[...] * Tom Foremski is right when he says The Internet Devalues Everything It Touches, Anything That Can Be Digitized. But you have to read Tom&#8217;s points deeply to get the full implications. Losing the old will be painful. But there is far more value to be found in the new. For example, in fourth parties. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] * Tom Foremski is right when he says The Internet Devalues Everything It Touches, Anything That Can Be Digitized. But you have to read Tom&#8217;s points deeply to get the full implications. Losing the old will be painful. But there is far more value to be found in the new. For example, in fourth parties. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ProjectVRM Blog &#187; Gain of Facebook</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/2009/04/12/vrm-and-the-four-party-system/comment-page-1/#comment-16074</link>
		<dc:creator>ProjectVRM Blog &#187; Gain of Facebook</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Jul 2009 14:30:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/?p=105#comment-16074</guid>
		<description>[...] companies of many kinds to step up. I think in general the biggest winners will be companies doing Fourth Party Services. Facebook could easily do that. So could others among the many &#8220;horsemen.&#8221; The problem [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] companies of many kinds to step up. I think in general the biggest winners will be companies doing Fourth Party Services. Facebook could easily do that. So could others among the many &#8220;horsemen.&#8221; The problem [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: party</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/2009/04/12/vrm-and-the-four-party-system/comment-page-1/#comment-15210</link>
		<dc:creator>party</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 24 May 2009 14:02:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/?p=105#comment-15210</guid>
		<description>looking for &lt;a href=&quot;http://partyspace.us&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt; space&lt;/a&gt; to arrange a 

&lt;a href=&quot;http://partyspace.us&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Party&lt;/a&gt; ?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>looking for <a href="http://partyspace.us" rel="nofollow"> space</a> to arrange a </p>
<p><a href="http://partyspace.us" rel="nofollow">Party</a> ?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Darius &#187; ProjectVRM Blog » VRM and the Four Party System</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/2009/04/12/vrm-and-the-four-party-system/comment-page-1/#comment-15152</link>
		<dc:creator>Darius &#187; ProjectVRM Blog » VRM and the Four Party System</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2009 00:29:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/?p=105#comment-15152</guid>
		<description>[...] [From ProjectVRM Blog » VRM and the Four Party System] [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] [From ProjectVRM Blog » VRM and the Four Party System] [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Which way for VRM? &#124; Right Side Up</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/2009/04/12/vrm-and-the-four-party-system/comment-page-1/#comment-14493</link>
		<dc:creator>Which way for VRM? &#124; Right Side Up</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2009 17:59:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/?p=105#comment-14493</guid>
		<description>[...] Interesting discussions on the VRM steering group prompted by Doc Searls&#8217; blogs about &#8216;fourth party services&#8217; (http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/2009/04/12/vrm-and-the-four-party-system/). [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Interesting discussions on the VRM steering group prompted by Doc Searls&#8217; blogs about &#8216;fourth party services&#8217; (<a href="http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/2009/04/12/vrm-and-the-four-party-system/)" rel="nofollow">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/2009/04/12/vrm-and-the-four-party-system/)</a>. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Doc Searls Weblog &#183; Silos End</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/2009/04/12/vrm-and-the-four-party-system/comment-page-1/#comment-13598</link>
		<dc:creator>Doc Searls Weblog &#183; Silos End</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2009 16:44:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/?p=105#comment-13598</guid>
		<description>[...] see business growing around buyers rather than sellers. These are what we&#8217;re starting to call fourth party services: ones that Joe Andrieu calls user-driven services. Here are his series of posts so far on the [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] see business growing around buyers rather than sellers. These are what we&#8217;re starting to call fourth party services: ones that Joe Andrieu calls user-driven services. Here are his series of posts so far on the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charles Andres</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/2009/04/12/vrm-and-the-four-party-system/comment-page-1/#comment-12508</link>
		<dc:creator>Charles Andres</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2009 20:09:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/vrm/?p=105#comment-12508</guid>
		<description>Comparing examples help determine whether a service is 4th party, 3rd party, 2nd party, or some combination.  The user is undeniably 1st party, but almost all other entities (business, agent, &#039;bot, subsidiary service) are open to interpretation. 

While we may debate whether Paypal is a 4th party (when acting on the user&#039;s behalf) we can use the following criteria to measure the degree to which an entity is acting in the 4th party role, enabling:
- user-preference: what, when, where, how much
- user-driven actions: choose, opt-in (and out), propose terms, direct, instruct, schedule, respond to exceptions, final approval.
- user-content:  portable, revokable, no use-rights limitations.
- user-independence, improved engagement, acts on users&#039; behalf, proliferate the minimum data possible within user-crafted contexts.

Where it gets uncertain is on the financial side:
- who pays for the service? what is the 4th parties&#039; business model?
- who benefits and to what degree? What are the tradeoffs?
- Is there a 2nd party advertising channel created? Can users opt-out?
- Are there restrictive TOS that constrain user actions or rights?

4th party service infrastructure is cheap enough to be ubiquitous, but not free. Someone must provide them at some cost, directly, or indirectly.

The world is not currently balanced with mutually beneficial relationships between vendors and consumers.  VRM was born in reaction to the one-way power exerted by vendors and their 3rd party agents on users. (When the producer names the tune, the consumer has got to dance.)  

Now, users have computerized network-enabled tools to push back -- market/product knowledge, freedom to assemble, organize, negotiate, expose bad behavior, etc.  (Tivo frees us from the totalitarian tv schedule times, etc).  CRM systems are less than 20 years old and used to be affordable only by corporations. But now, processing power, networking bandwidth, and storage are low cost commodities, making personal private data systems and user controlled &#039;bots possible.  

But this may not be enough. Users are not demanding their rights; few see a problem with the current system. (150 years will do that)... 2nd parties are likely to co-opt any user-driven movement (as always, what was revolutionary becomes mainstream -- Led Zeppelin, Peter Townshend songs sell cars).  Open source volunteers may build it, but companies are only likely to adopt what is to their benefit.  This may just mean it will take a long time.  Or it may like Doc suggests, happen the way email freed itself from the AOL Prodigy, CompuServe silos. 

The catalyst to moving to a VRM future quickly is to convince 2nd parties that it is in their interest to embrace a user-driven environment.  Integrating 4th parties into the supply chain to lower cost, reduce risk, improve customer service, and ultimately sell more to those who want to buy are ways to speed this up.  Given the current upheaval in stable business models, we could see 21st Century user-driven business practices emerge as value-differentiators that increase market share.

My &#039;bot will call your &#039;bot.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Comparing examples help determine whether a service is 4th party, 3rd party, 2nd party, or some combination.  The user is undeniably 1st party, but almost all other entities (business, agent, &#8216;bot, subsidiary service) are open to interpretation. </p>
<p>While we may debate whether Paypal is a 4th party (when acting on the user&#8217;s behalf) we can use the following criteria to measure the degree to which an entity is acting in the 4th party role, enabling:<br />
- user-preference: what, when, where, how much<br />
- user-driven actions: choose, opt-in (and out), propose terms, direct, instruct, schedule, respond to exceptions, final approval.<br />
- user-content:  portable, revokable, no use-rights limitations.<br />
- user-independence, improved engagement, acts on users&#8217; behalf, proliferate the minimum data possible within user-crafted contexts.</p>
<p>Where it gets uncertain is on the financial side:<br />
- who pays for the service? what is the 4th parties&#8217; business model?<br />
- who benefits and to what degree? What are the tradeoffs?<br />
- Is there a 2nd party advertising channel created? Can users opt-out?<br />
- Are there restrictive TOS that constrain user actions or rights?</p>
<p>4th party service infrastructure is cheap enough to be ubiquitous, but not free. Someone must provide them at some cost, directly, or indirectly.</p>
<p>The world is not currently balanced with mutually beneficial relationships between vendors and consumers.  VRM was born in reaction to the one-way power exerted by vendors and their 3rd party agents on users. (When the producer names the tune, the consumer has got to dance.)  </p>
<p>Now, users have computerized network-enabled tools to push back &#8212; market/product knowledge, freedom to assemble, organize, negotiate, expose bad behavior, etc.  (Tivo frees us from the totalitarian tv schedule times, etc).  CRM systems are less than 20 years old and used to be affordable only by corporations. But now, processing power, networking bandwidth, and storage are low cost commodities, making personal private data systems and user controlled &#8216;bots possible.  </p>
<p>But this may not be enough. Users are not demanding their rights; few see a problem with the current system. (150 years will do that)&#8230; 2nd parties are likely to co-opt any user-driven movement (as always, what was revolutionary becomes mainstream &#8212; Led Zeppelin, Peter Townshend songs sell cars).  Open source volunteers may build it, but companies are only likely to adopt what is to their benefit.  This may just mean it will take a long time.  Or it may like Doc suggests, happen the way email freed itself from the AOL Prodigy, CompuServe silos. </p>
<p>The catalyst to moving to a VRM future quickly is to convince 2nd parties that it is in their interest to embrace a user-driven environment.  Integrating 4th parties into the supply chain to lower cost, reduce risk, improve customer service, and ultimately sell more to those who want to buy are ways to speed this up.  Given the current upheaval in stable business models, we could see 21st Century user-driven business practices emerge as value-differentiators that increase market share.</p>
<p>My &#8216;bot will call your &#8216;bot.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
