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

Bye bye BetterSlack

g3rv4.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 392 posts

Re: Bye bye BetterSlack

#161

Post by jklinger410 »

jahewson wrote: post #126
mattigames wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

False, how a website is rendered on a device I own is not enforceable (legally speaking) by a acceptable use policy or any website policy; otherwise people would just use that to deter ad-blockers browsers extensions instead of all the shady tactics commonly used.

That’s not the case at all. Your “ownership” of the device isn’t that important in the grand scheme of things. If you’ve signed an agreement with Slack not to modify their product, then you don’t get to modify their product. Blocking ads is not quite the same thing as modifying a product - but I don’t see any obvious reason why an EULA which forbids ad-blocking wouldn’t be enforceable. Though it would be deeply unpop…

>Blocking ads is not quite the same thing as modifying a product

Explain.

Re: Bye bye BetterSlack

#162

Post by giancarlostoro »

craigsmansion wrote: post #59

"we prefer that you do not include the word “Slack” in your product’s name." From the people who had no problems naming their product identical to the colloquial name of the oldest maintained GNU/Linux distribution, thereby confusing the hell out of actual technical people for the longest time with press releases. Also, Bob Dobbs called... (Edit: you can take away my upticks, but you will never take away my slack. "H…

Not sure I was ever confused by Slack's name, I just never knew what it was for ages until finally I used it, and after seeing the name crop up on HN so often I had to eventually look for myself.

Re: Bye bye BetterSlack

#163

Post by g3rv4 »

phailhaus wrote: post #87
g3rv4 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess... I'm sorry? and I'll try to do better next time, I promise.

How dare you choose not to put yourself in legal jeopardy for the sake of random people on the internet! Please feel free to ignore everyone here. You made a Cool Thing, it didn't work out, whatever. You'll probably make more Cool Things in the future and I hope they'll stick!

<3 thanks :) yes, it’s particularly hard because I’ve never disappointed anyone before :P

Re: Bye bye BetterSlack

#164

Post by ballenf »

scoom wrote: post #89
tptacek wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He should talk to a lawyer, especially if he accepted a binding agreement by using Slack that forbids any of the research he did to figure out how to get his integrations to work.

A binding agreement? Why would he sign one of those?

He talked in detail about how his company is long-time user of Slack. He and his colleagues each agreed to the "no reverse engineering" terms when they signed up.

Maybe the agreement isn't binding depending on his local jurisdiction, but it's unclear how he could use Slack without agreeing (or at least clicking "agree") to the terms.

Re: Bye bye BetterSlack

#165

Post by detaro »

noxToken wrote: post #83
g3rv4 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because... I have lots of things to work on, lots of things I want to build, lots of people I want to talk with. None of them involve talking with a lawyer in a different country over something that's really not that important in my life.

I see all of these comments in here telling you that Slack doesn't have a leg to stand on, that you should do your best to stick it to them, that you're in the right, that you should ignore them, etc. Meanwhile, I'm thinking, "If I were in this person's shoes, I'd probably distribute it privately to a few people who might want it, and in spite of all the hard work, let the project die in official capacity." On princi…

Especially since anyone thinking it should continue can just fork and do so.

Re: Bye bye BetterSlack

#166

Post by TeMPOraL »

stunt wrote: post #99
g3rv4 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this was a bunch of Tampermonkey scripts... but I don't want to ignore their cease and desist. I... just don't do it. changing the name is not an issue... however, if I have to take it down, that's moot.

@g3rv4, I understand it really sucks and feels terrible. But I also understand their reaction. Don't be surprised about legal writing. He/She as a legal person is responsible for writing in a very clear and explicit way since any misunderstanding might cost the reader or themselves in the future. It just shows their accountability. You don't want a misunderstanding cost you trouble. I have colleagues working in the l…

> But I also understand their reaction.

And I don't. I mean, charitably this could be attributed to some non-tech person noticing the extension and sending/asking legal to send a C&D because they didn't like it. That's the only thing I can think of, because the alternative is plain malice. This is a client-side modification, the main part of their letter is just absurd, and the justification is nonsense.

Re: Bye bye BetterSlack

#167

Post by barbegal »

jjeaff wrote: post #160
barbegal wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whilst it is true that the extension has no legal obligation to follow the acceptable use policy, users do have to follow the policy and the courts would argue this extension coerces users to break the policy. The legal precedent is Blizzard vs Bossland [1] which Bossland lost in the UK courts [1], US courts [2] and German courts [3] [1] https://www.bristows.com/news-and-publications/articles/bris... [2] https://www.…

I'd say a large part of blizzard winning this case was the intent of the software. The interfering software was intended to facilitate cheating. I think it would be unlikely to have won, had the software been made to streamline the game or make it run faster.

I agree with you there, to win the case there would have to be some economic reason for Slack to not want users to use this extension.

The reason they state is "Injecting javascript into Slack via Chrome extension can have an impact on the privacy and security of our customers and our product. Furthermore, this can create reliability issues when we ship product updates." If they can prove that is true then the case stands up but if BetterSlack doesn't impact security, privacy or reliability then the case would probably be dismissed.

There's some excellent analysis of this sort of case here https://ir.law.fsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1101&cont...

Re: Bye bye BetterSlack

#168

Post by yonran »

comesee wrote: post #7

I dont see any legal reason why you can't publish the extension under a different name. Your extension is under no legal obligation to follow their acceptable use policy, only the users that use your extension.

One of Chrome Web Store’s terms is that a developer is not allowed to publish an extension that “knowingly violates a third party’s terms of service.”[1] So even if the author has the 1st Amendment right to publish the extension on his own website, Google will likely take it down from the Chrome Web Store.

[1]: https://developer.chrome.com/webstore/terms

Re: Bye bye BetterSlack

#169

Post by tluyben2 »

g3rv4 wrote: post #66
mosselman wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I... just don't do it." You mean you do not ignore cease and desist orders by principal? Why? There should be at least some criteria by which you judge which ones you can ignore and which you can't? What if they told you to cease and desist programming forever on any project because they state in their terms that once you mess with their UI with JavaScript you are not allowed to program anymore? Ridiculous right? So…

Because... I have lots of things to work on, lots of things I want to build, lots of people I want to talk with. None of them involve talking with a lawyer in a different country over something that's really not that important in my life.

Maybe let other people continue it? Shame to throw stuff away. Plenty of countries where that cease and desist would go straight to thrash.

Re: Bye bye BetterSlack

#170

Post by TeMPOraL »

dagi3d wrote: post #123
ateesdalejr wrote: post #77

> Injecting javascript into Slack via Chrome extension can have an impact on the privacy and security of our customers and our product. So can taking screenshots of messages. If injecting JS can possibly affect the security of your platform then that's a vulnerability you should fix, not send a C&D to some developer about.

Hard to solve that if the browser allows that via the extensions mechanism.

But that's utterly ridiculous. All the data Slack sends to my browser is already mine to view, so if there's an issue of "privacy and security", it's on their end.
Post reply on HN