If Twitter hadn't been acting like a jerk to their developer community for the last 2 years, I would completely side with Twitter on this.
However, given Twitter's recent behavior of backpedalling on expectations they set for developing on their platform, and their disrespect for developers who've been cheerleading and building apps for them the last 6 years, I'm glad to see someone fight back the best they can. If for no other reason than to illustrate that they're acting like jerks. Unfortunately, given Twitter's response and hand waving dismissal, I don't think they received the message. They could have at least paid a little lip-service. Ya' know, act like they give a damn.
This lawsuit seems like crap, and it makes me feel really uncomfortable -- what if I don't have millions in VC funding? It basically means that a random person with enough resources can tie me down with a bogus lawsuit even if I have a legally-sound contract that is supposed to protect me.
I agree that Twitter backtracked on their API and platform, but a bogus lawsuit is the exact opposite of the right way to fight back. Even though App.net and others have their flaws, that is the "right" way: developers have to steal people's attention away from Twitter instead of going for a lawsuit that doesn't make sense.
I don't see how even deep and reasonable lack of sympathy for Twitter, and equally deep sympathy for PeopleBrowsr, has any bearing on Twitter's right to terminate a contract it has a clear right to terminate.
Unless Twitter is grossly misrepresenting the facts, PeopleBrowsr knew perfectly well what terms they were getting their access on. The contract expired 16 months ago and has been automatically renewed on a month-by-month basis, with a 30 days notice period. Twitter then gave notice.
Taking sides in a legal battle based on which party dots their Is with little hearts, instead of based on logical arguments and legal precedent, is ignorant.
It strikes me a little odd that twitter doesn't want to have a larger hand in their data distribution. Having some one else handle it seems like something a non-tech company would do. Scaling and automating the distribution to subscribers doesn't strike me as a problem twitter would have a hard time solving and I hardly doubt they need any one else to sell it for them from a marketing standpoint. What, from a business perspective, do you suppose is driving their decision to only work with three companies?
Last I heard, the firehose is something like 30MB/s of data. Maybe maintaining a pipe like that to a large number of subscribers is just not what Twitter wants to spend its time or money on.
Its an interesting twist, if you reason that part of Twitter's enterprise value is its Firehose data then unwinding these contracts is in Twitter's best interest. However I have experienced first hand problems with contracts written "pre-success" that didn't anticipate what success would look like. Depending on the players those have generally been amended amicably. On the other hand it does seem like it will damage Peoplebrowsr's product to lose access. Perhaps its just a money question?
This happens especially a lot with companies that don't actually have and programmers on staff. Changing means of access means they basically have to buy their outsourced app all over again...
[+] [-] abootstrapper|13 years ago|reply
However, given Twitter's recent behavior of backpedalling on expectations they set for developing on their platform, and their disrespect for developers who've been cheerleading and building apps for them the last 6 years, I'm glad to see someone fight back the best they can. If for no other reason than to illustrate that they're acting like jerks. Unfortunately, given Twitter's response and hand waving dismissal, I don't think they received the message. They could have at least paid a little lip-service. Ya' know, act like they give a damn.
Humbug!
[+] [-] shantanubala|13 years ago|reply
I agree that Twitter backtracked on their API and platform, but a bogus lawsuit is the exact opposite of the right way to fight back. Even though App.net and others have their flaws, that is the "right" way: developers have to steal people's attention away from Twitter instead of going for a lawsuit that doesn't make sense.
[+] [-] mseebach|13 years ago|reply
Unless Twitter is grossly misrepresenting the facts, PeopleBrowsr knew perfectly well what terms they were getting their access on. The contract expired 16 months ago and has been automatically renewed on a month-by-month basis, with a 30 days notice period. Twitter then gave notice.
[+] [-] debacle|13 years ago|reply
Taking sides in a legal battle based on which party dots their Is with little hearts, instead of based on logical arguments and legal precedent, is ignorant.
[+] [-] jbwyme|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] skrebbel|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] InAnEmergency|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ChuckMcM|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lnanek2|13 years ago|reply