You can't fool Archive.org
Published on August 2, 2005 By Istari In WinCustomize News

Editorial:
deviantART is possibly the most popular art community on the Internet. Its community has been friends with our community since the beginning of this site. Its adminstrators have hung out here and WC's admins have hung out there. With milliosn of visitors a month, dA seems on the precipe of huge success. But last week, the company that owns deviantART fired the popular community founder Scott Jarkoff (aka "Jark").

More troubling has been the seemingly rewriting of history. Most long time members of the skinning community remember that it was Jark and his friend Matteo who founded and nursed deviantART. That it was their site and their vision. Such communities regularly get bought out by companies but rarely are the original founders rewritten to be minor players in the tail.

The CEO of the company that owns deviantART wrote this in response to the recent uproar over the dismissal of Jark: Spyed's response:Link

Excerpt:

"jark and I have worked together on deviantART from day 1. A little bit after the first year, we were joined by $mccann who created the Sonique MP3 player back in 1998. He began providing us with technical and financial assistance to keep it going.

Before this, deviantART was quite small and the costs of operation were nominal. With it's rapid growth thereafter, it began costing an arm and a leg to operate.

I was the first person to work on deviantART full time in 2002, and am also the only co-founder who took the risk of working with no salary at all. That is how much I believe in this community. I have dedicated my life to it. The other two co-founders have never worked fulltime on deviantART. They have always had either college, or a full-time job to contend with. Without question, especially in the early to mid parts of deviantART's life, Scott (°jark) sacraficed all of his available free time. And this was a significant sacrifice.

The second fulltime employee of deviantART was $chris at around the same time I joined in 2002. He was our CTO; today he manages our architecture.

I personally hand built and "installed" deviantART's first 35 servers. Chris rebuilt and maintained all of deviantART's code-base, servers and architecture beginning in 2002. We're talking math, computer science, architecture. That kind of stuff."

But Archive.org's caching of deviantART doesn't support these claims. deviantART was founded in late 2000 and even going forward into 2001, Spyed is not listed on the contact page. Why would a founder of the site not be listed on the contact page? Even using their dates -- 2002, that's a full two years after deviantART was founded which is a long time in the Internet world. By then, deviantART was already a success. Archive.org cashes throughout 2001 and into 2002 all list Jark, Matteo and a handful of others as the ones in charge, no mention of Spyed at all. It wasn't until mid 2002 before Angelo Sotira began being mentioned as CEO of "deviantART, Inc.", two years after the site's founding.

This isn't to diminish the importance of good business, capital, and infrastructure in deviantART's successful history. But deviantART wasn't founded in mid 2002. It was founded in 2000. Had deviantART been founded in 2002, even with the investment their CEO had lined up, it is unlikely that deviantART would be where it is today. deviantART's success was was a matter of timing. It was one of the few established art-related community sites left when the dot-com crashed in 2001. Through the efforts of its original community founders, it was in a position by 2002/2003 to be taken to the next level by investors. Both the company and the community founders were crucial in the site's success. But it is unenthical to discount the critical contribution that a couple of visionaries had, back in 2000, to create deviantART in the first place.
 


Comments (Page 3)
3 Pages1 2 3 
on Aug 03, 2005
Jafo, is Jark stupid?
on Aug 03, 2005
I'll keep my deviations at dA for the time beeing. But until further development of this issue I will not upload any more devations or renew my subscription.

btw, did anyone else notice that the guy posting that email at Blogger called himself "devDeepThroat"?
on Aug 03, 2005
 StephanA ...no, but I fear he may have taken his eye off the ball....and it's now dribbling to the other end of the field....[the ball, not his eye]...
on Aug 03, 2005
Ultimately, control of a website based company boils down to who has control over the domain. How others got control of the domain and under what terms and conditions that control was transferred is the million dollar question.
on Aug 04, 2005
Yup. Jarkles is in Japan, Spyed plus servers are in the US, so it was unlikely to have happened the other way around.
on Aug 04, 2005
Ultimately, control of a website based company boils down to who has control over the domain. How others got control of the domain and under what terms and conditions that control was transferred is the million dollar question.


DA is pretty web pased, but after the courts (I believe) said cyber-squatting is illegal, does it really matter who owns the domain? If Jark is victor, he would get the url back (if he doesn't own it in the first place for whatever reasons)?

If Microsoft doesn't renew its URL for some reason, can someone just take it and use it for their own project?


It's so funny that this guy just KNOWS how influencial he was to the success of dA. However noone out there has really recognized him for anything specific that he's done (aside from asserting his own greatness).


Damn right! LOL




In the end I don't know about this from an inside level. It seems to me though, even without all of the 'leaked emails' and other such ramblings, that Liquidsoft and/or Deviant Art Inc made a bad business decision here.


Out of all of this craziness, that is what bothers me the most. I like DA and want it to last, but how can it if it makes its decisions based off of wackiness? I can bet my cup of tea that the reason for this move was, at best, not researched enough in the first place.

I could be wrong about Liquidsoft's decision to remove Jark, but I don't think I'm wrong.
on Aug 04, 2005
... and I still find it SOOOOO funny that the about page of DA changed from its original state on how DA was started. I would think if certain members owned said website from the beginning, that his name would have been there.


I also wonder who those links to the Web Archive don't work... there is a case in court about businesses not wanting archived pages of their website.
on Aug 04, 2005

Developer joeKnowledge ...this isn't about a Url...and/or cyber-squatting ...it's about a corporate take-over of dubious legality [at best].

There's nothing 'SOOOOO funny' about changing the 'about page of DA'....rewriting history has been a popular practise....usually done by people who either have usurped power, or by people who will be embarassed by the record retention....and that's often one and the same.

It can be left to the public's imagination....[read a book] for those to find parallels in history...

on Aug 04, 2005
Well, the one thing you can gather from the latest post by Jark is that the "e-mail" everyone had read and was speculating about must be the real thing. All of the facts fit. Let the court proceedings begin. GO JARK!!!!
on Aug 07, 2005
You might find this journal an interesting read: http://pachunka.deviantart.com/journal/6151291/#journal
on Aug 16, 2005
Angelo has been there since before Day 1. If you want to claim that Angelo deserves no founding credit, the same should go for Matt. The fact that Angelo's involvement was in the beginning entirely background is being taken advantage of and it's not right.

You can only trust archive.org as far as the people who put together the pages it displays. I see the same kind of trust being put in the Wikipedia entry. Drives me nuts, I tell ya.
on Aug 20, 2005
I think I read this somewhere else but whoever said it was right. DeviantArt is the collective rectum alright. What happens when you concenrate a bunch of self involved, melodramatic teens into one site? You get DeviantArt. Now the person who created that culture is going to probably find out that those same self involved melodramatic teens will do nothing more than squeek for a couple of weeks and then move on to their next "cause".
on Aug 20, 2005
If Microsoft doesn't renew its URL for some reason, can someone just take it and use it for their own project?


Microsoft sued some kid a while back for coming up with a URL that almost matched the word "Microsoft" so basically he was sent a cease and desist letter.
3 Pages1 2 3