Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Take down my reverse-engineered Snapchat lib because they asked?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 137 posts

Re: Ask HN: Take down my reverse-engineered Snapchat lib because they asked?

#23

Post by nathanb »

late2part wrote: post #8

A lot of times when you use a product, you're required to agree to an EULA wherein you promise/commit to not reverse engineer a product or its protocols. If you did use snapchat as a registered user, this issue could affect you negatively. Another alternative is to mail them back and ask them for clarification. Why do they consider it an infringement? The law clearly states the following: (2) No person shall manufact…

Yeah, isn't that one of the things that ended up getting geohot in trouble with the PS3? They found an account where he had agreed to the TOS, thus putting him in violation of the same?

Re: Ask HN: Take down my reverse-engineered Snapchat lib because they asked?

#25

Post by mikhailt »

They give you less than 12 hours to respond? Really?

I would seek a lawyer if you can afford one and if not, then you can't afford a lawsuit either, so in this case, pull it offline. If you do the latter, you should post the results of your research somewhere, this can't be taken down as it is sharing information and not an API tool.

Re: Ask HN: Take down my reverse-engineered Snapchat lib because they asked?

#27

Post by bradleyland »

petsos wrote: post #20
mattmaroon wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Asking for moral advice when you need legal advice isn't a good idea. The two are often conflicting.

Save the lecturing, you don't know if he needs legal advice. Maybe he has already gotten legal advice.

The quote below is decidedly "legal" in nature. The meta-question of whether the author is interested in moral guidance or legal advice is immaterial, as the framework within which Snapchat is operating is legal.

> I am under the impression that reverse engineering is still protected under fair use doctrines. Is this the case? How should I respond, if at all?

Speaking as someone who has been involved in an arduous civil matter for the last four years, matmaroon's advice would be well heeded.

Re: Ask HN: Take down my reverse-engineered Snapchat lib because they asked?

#28

Post by peterkelly »

I've just forked it on Github, as have 25 others (as I write this).

As with file formats, the notion that network protocols & APIs should ever be granted any type of protection and that no-one other than the creators should be able to write software that conforms to these protocols is ridiculous.

Snapchat, in my view, have every right to restrict who uses their service and in what manner - via standard mechanisms like API keys and login credentials. But preventing third-party implementations of protocols or APIs is so 90s. Oracle had a bit of trouble with this recently.

One problem I'm personally trying to remedy is the proliferation of various APIs and protocols for accessing various online storage services (Dropbox, Google Drive, Box etc) by developing an SDK that supports all of them. We need more of this kind of these kinds of projects, not less.

Micah Schaffer, if you're reading this, you're welcome to send me a takedown request and discuss the issue with me. My email address is in my profile.

EDIT: It's at 62 now. I wouldn't be surprised if even Barbra Streisand has forked it.

Post reply on HN