3 ms·

It isn't a "public" API, it's Facebook's API that they're making available to the public. They have the right to control access to their API, be it by password

• SeanDav 10y ago
  > "Facebook is under no obligation to support the business model of another company..." Agreed, but neither should they have the ability to destroy a business by the single act of sending out a letter. Pretty much from that point on the company can't legally operate.
  • nxc18 10y ago
    If you build a company that is a) fully dependent on another company to exist and b) reliant on that company providing you service it doesn't have any business reason to provide, then you the founder of the company destroyed it. If a business is flimsy enough to be destroyed by a letter, it was toast anyway. Not to mention this argument that someone else's business is this precious thing that can't be destroyed. Its totally bizarre. How often does Apple release features that eat another company's lunch? Better yet, think of all the disruptive SV business models that are purely based on destroying businesses and replacing them with alternatives.
    • SeanDav 10y ago
      > "If a business is flimsy enough to be destroyed by a letter, it was toast anyway." Completely disagree. In the early stages of its life, almost any business is very vulnerable. If Microsoft had irritated IBM just the slightest bit in the early days, they would have been toast, or at best a small niche company, because they were completely dependant on IBM's goodwill. An IBM executive could have decided they preferred the boys at Apple instead. no letter even required. Yet look at Microsoft today. Who is to say that a business starting out using a Facebook API today, could not diversify and be a powerhouse and industry leader, tomorrow? The point is that this ruling allows one company to make illegal, the business activity of another just by sending out a letter irrespective of whether that company's activity is actually illegal
      • drivingmenuts 10y ago
        It became illegal when Power circumvented the C&D letter to continue accessing systems they had expressly been forbidden to access. Their conduct was fine until FB decided they wanted no part in it. This is how it should be. If I, as a company, decide I don't want to do business with you, either individually or corporately, barring discrimination rules, why shouldn't I have that right?
  • drivingmenuts 10y ago
    Facebook has the right to determine who can and cannot access their systems, barring a court order. You seem to be suggesting they should not have that right.
    • 205guy 10y ago
      But Power was using its customers' fb users' credentials with their permission, so it was fb users "who" accessed fb. Only they did it through other computers that were owned by Power. Should fb have the right to determine what and which computer you use to access fb?
  • deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
• clarkmoody 10y ago
  So you're saying that a business should be able to deny service to any customer for any reason? (For the record, I agree)