[mazambazz]

I've seen you make the comment about the OS being open-sourced a lot. But this largely has nothing to do with the OS. This is a conversation about infrastructure and data. The concern (from what I gathered and will condense greatly) is that Core will take in all the current app data and infrastructure setup, duplicate it themselves, move themselves off of Rebble, and continue developing on it privately.

[agloe_dreams]

Which to be absurdly clear - is exactly what Rebble did to Pebble. They scraped the apps and are now mad that someone else could do the same to them.

[mazambazz]

I don't think it's equivalent. When Rebble did what they did, it was because Pebble was going under and they had no EOL plan. Rebble took it upon themselves to carry the torch without having been passed it.

If Core were to do the same thing here, it's not the same, because Rebble is still active. You can't kill what's already dead (Pebble), but Rebble is very much still alive.

[Avamander]

It is not. If Core wants, they can take the old Pebble dump and start building on top of it like Rebble has. All is fair.

[micromacrofoot]

Why would Core agree to pay Rebble a per user fee if they wanted to destroy them? they could just say "nope you get nothing"

And how would this prevent Rebble from continuing to operate in the event that Pebble failed again?

Open sourcing the OS makes continuity in the event of a failure much easier for Rebble right?