4 ms·
There's a difference between Google turning off a feature and Google cutting off a whole service. This is the kind of thing negotiated with contracts. Lawyers o
by bastawhiz 8y ago
There's a difference between Google turning off a feature and Google cutting off a whole service. This is the kind of thing negotiated with contracts. Lawyers on both sides. If you build your business around another company, you protect yourself. Twitter with surely get sued for this, if for no reason other than failure to provide a service that they promised to customers in writing. Thankfully, your flavor of cynicism generally does not apply in situations like this where many tens (or hundreds) of thousands of dollars are at stake.
- busterarm 8y ago> Thankfully, your flavor of cynicism generally does not apply in situations like this where many tens (or hundreds) of thousands of dollars are at stake. This will be how it turns out for a few big players with deep enough pockets. Surely though this is hurting somebody's business that can't afford the lawsuit -- potentially to the point of putting them out of business. That's good for Twitter (and especially Twitter, as precarious as they are). We've all joked for years about how FAANG pay their engineers so much mostly to keep other companies from being able to hire great engineers. We've gotten the big three slapped for colluding against their employees on wages. Why do you think they would engage in some anti-competitive business practices and not others?
- consp 8y agoCouldn't you file a amicus curiae, advice the court and state the company has harmed multiple people which are unable to defend due to cost, wait for the case to settle with the big guys and then sue with reference to the original case? Not a lawyer, just interested.