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

Otonomo, with nearly $55M in funding, is cloning our product

smartcar.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 637 posts

Re: Otonomo, with nearly $55M in funding, is cloning our product

#391

Post by danielfoster »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #44

That is pretty egregious, and its also par for the course. And that is why startup companies go through all the hoops of being "stealth" and having NDAs and what not. There was a German VC firm that was, as I recall, very upfront about this. Clone a successful US company before it got to the European market. On the one hand it is great to have validation of the idea, on the other its a pain to have someone with more…

Copying as a business model is pretty shitty as is copying legitimate IP. But if Company B can execute a similar concept faster and better than Company A, that's ultimately better for society.

This situation looks very egregious though.

Re: Otonomo, with nearly $55M in funding, is cloning our product

#392

Post by cgy1 »

janoc wrote: post #327
jerf wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't particularly agree with you; I've often thought that amounts to trying to win the debate by nuking the entire playing field. Even if you win, have you? But I can spot you that anyhow, because there's a perfectly reasonable fallback position: This is illegal . It's a copyright infringement at the very least, and possibly other things as well. And being "illegal", the "what are you gonna do about it" actually h…

Copying a design is not illegal . Unless the design is patented (which it doesn't seem to be or the OP would likely have said so in the article), everyone is free to copy any design they want. That you wish something was true doesn't make it so, unfortunately. What is not OK is copying the documentation verbatim, that is copyrighted. However, that is, frankly, the least of the problems (and easiest to rectify) when s…

I see two issued US patents for smartcar: https://patents.google.com/patent/US9870656B2/ https://patents.google.com/patent/US10169825B2/

Re: Otonomo, with nearly $55M in funding, is cloning our product

#393

Post by ruchitmatalia »

Besides the blatant copy.

I think Otonomo needs to decide whether they using oauth v1 or v2.

Point being, the quality of work is speaking for itself.

JSON FROM OTONOMO ------------------- https://consent.otonomo.io/oauth/v1/authorize?response_type=...

curl https://consent.otonomo.io/oauth/v1/token \

Documents Shows ------------------- response_type

This value must be set to code. OAuth2 outlines multiple authorization types.

Re: Otonomo, with nearly $55M in funding, is cloning our product

#394

Post by frandroid »

stingraycharles wrote: post #366
matz1 wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then can't you too find other investor for yourself ? You have the advantage being the one that come out with the idea to sell it to the investor. Or heck pitch it to the same investor too.

They should definitely reach out to the investor. But not before getting proper legal advice on the matter.

eyeroll

Investor: "Oh I wonder what other IP we can steal from them under the guise of due diligence"

Re: Otonomo, with nearly $55M in funding, is cloning our product

#395

Post by blotter_paper »

tobilg wrote: post #360
blotter_paper wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Companies have been known to talk about expensive and complicated features or options in order to get people trying to copy their success to waste time and money on something for which there is no actual demand. Anyone know of a specific documented example of this? I'm not really doubting, just interested.

I think their first startup was an eBay clone called alando.de which was later sold to eBay when they entered the German market ( https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samwer-Brüder#Alando in German)

Thanks, but I think you're supporting a different claim by OP. I'm asking about the spread of disinformation to derail the development efforts of clones, not the creation of clones.

Re: Otonomo, with nearly $55M in funding, is cloning our product

#396

Post by garmaine »

asveikau wrote: post #388
da_chicken wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple is the perfect counter example here. Apple wasn't the first company to make an MP3 player, but the generic term is basically 'iPod'. Apple wasn't the first company to make a smartphones or touchscreens, but the generic term for a touchscreen smartphone is basically 'iPhone'. Apple wasn't the first company to make a tablet, but the generic term is basically 'iPad'. Apple didn't invent high resolution displays fo…

I feel like some of these examples could be US-centric phenomena. We in the US tend to confuse brand names with product categories, and in other markets the Apple brand doesn't have the same dominance in most of these.

Apple dominates a lot more in many desirable foreign markets.

Re: Otonomo, with nearly $55M in funding, is cloning our product

#397

Post by samsudden »

reredacted wrote: post #356
whoisjuan wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What likely happened here is a remote team was paid to generate docs with a directive like, “Smartcar has a good API,” and stole them directly. They didn't steal the docs (not only the docs). They stole the whole public facing architecture as evidenced by the fact that they are using in some instances the exact same API resources names and method names.

But we don't know that, do we? They only showed some auth code. The OP does _not_ show that Otonomo has duplicated any business APIs, and Otonomo took their docs down. Unless someone has proof Otonomo copied more than just the examples documented in the OP, this is just pure PR fluff.

Yes, unless the business API was duplicated as well (and as noted above, there is no indication that they were), it just points to someone being lazy in writing up auth documentation.

Duplicated parameter names would be expected in this case, and preferred actually, so that they conform to the OAuth spec :-) The descriptive text is not an exact copy as well. From what we know, the only damning bit is that parameter values were exactly the same as in smartcar's documentation, which while not condonable, is not as egregious as it would be, had Otonomo cloned the business API as well.

Re: Otonomo, with nearly $55M in funding, is cloning our product

#398

Post by taurath »

brk wrote: post #170
mkolodny wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Summary: They are vulnerable - Get 'em Or, go get $55 Million in VC funding from someone else. You have a major head start. Your company is theoretically worth at least as much as theirs. Complaining about competitors copying you might slow them down a bit. But it will probably slow you down a lot more. On the other hand, using their valuation to raise $55M+ would be a huge boost for you.

"Your company is theoretically worth at least as much as theirs." Maybe. Having worked in the auto industry (albeit well over a decade ago), it is one of those industries where connections, and knowing how to navigate the relationships, goes a long way. I don't know much about either of these companies, or their founders, but in B2B scenarios like this, the value is often related to much more than just the underlying…

The fact that in-car tech is so bad in general is a good indicator that the auto industry is a relationship industry. Its a golf course based business, and building the tech is the "easy" part. See also: the payments and especially credit card space - if you don't start up with the backing of a major player your entire business hinges on bus-dev and exec relationships to convince the incumbents to let you play in the space.

Re: Otonomo, with nearly $55M in funding, is cloning our product

#399

Post by ItsJason »

KorematsuFred wrote: post #380
kobiguru wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DOn't take this lightly if you are serious about the website. DMCA takedown is worldwide and with European copyright laws in place you have more reasons to worry. Talk to a good copyright attorney. There are many, seek the help of NGOs in this area. Do NOT sit back.

I have blocked my site for Europe any ways. I will not comply with European laws of any kind as the site is fully hosted and run from India. I would rather focus my energy on getting Indian government pass laws that will protect us rather than pay an attorney for my non profitable website.

Very good prioritization. Focus on providing value rather than deal with trolls in countries outside your target market!

Re: Otonomo, with nearly $55M in funding, is cloning our product

#400

Post by WillPostForFood »

jacquesm wrote: post #175
WillPostForFood wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do we know that the investment predates the public api documentation?

Bessemer's last round was a series 'B', by then the bits and pieces would have all been in place, whether it was public or not isn't even all that important. It does raise an interesting question though: how will the OP prove that their work is the original, that might hinge on a lot of unknowns, more difficult still if the work was originally lifted by an employee of the company and then passed on to Otonomo with th…

Yes, seems likely, but user documentation often comes really late in the process.
Post reply on HN