9 ms·

Facebook intimidates developer, bans him and his code for life

172 points by surfingdino 15y ago

JonnieCache 15y ago
>but it also seriously limits his chances of finding employment as a programmer. That doesn't sound quite right. TOO HOT FOR FACEBOOK!!! could look great on the right résumé. The whole thing is just what we've come to expect from facebook by now tbh.
- surfingdino 15y ago
  I'd say it limits his chances of finding any employment where facebook is used for communication.
  - elemeno 15y ago
    To my mind, that sounds like a good thing. My employer using Facebook for communication sounds just terrible.
    - zalew 15y ago
      not only terrible but irresponsible
- ww520 15y ago
  If that limits his chances of finding a programmer job, his talent is very limited.
  - surfingdino 15y ago
    Employers often do background checks and if they find out he was banned by Facebook that may work against him.
    - cookiecaper 15y ago
      Background checks ping public records for things like convictions and residence history. There is no way a "ban from Facebook" would show up on one of these.
      - vectorpush 15y ago
        Background checks these days pretty typically include your name being googled, especially if it's in tech.
        killerdark 15y ago
        No it doesn't. Source: Living in CA, had several Background checks (CA allows the subject to receive a copy of the background check).
    - ww520 15y ago
      How do employers find out the ban? I thought it's a private matter. Does Facebook have a list of all banned developers?
      - surfingdino 15y ago
        He published the info on the internet. Will be easy to find using Google.
        ww520 15y ago
        So it's like he put it in his resume. I am sorry. I feel sorry for the guy, and I don't know whether Facebook is justified in banning him. But if Facebook doesn't want to play ball, just move on.
      - a_a_r_o_n 15y ago
        I found it and I wasn't even looking for it.
  - Agathos 15y ago
    In the future, all restaurants are Taco Bell and all computer systems are Facebook.
    - joemoon 15y ago
      For anyone curious, this a reference to Demolition Man: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFiDoOgRTpk http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFiDoOgRTpk
- k-mcgrady 15y ago
  It could cause problems for him if the company he wants to work at uses the Facebook API. The work might be done through the company's account but the company may not want to risk Facebook finding out he is part of their team and shutting them down.
- vectorpush 15y ago
  True, but it does suck to be banned from the ubiquitous platform in which you've spent time becoming highly specialized. edit: Apparently he developed a browser plugin that doesn't use Facebook's API, so it looks like this may actually be a decent endorsement.
  - qqqqqq 15y ago
    Yes it does. But programming is one of those nice fields where you can usually pick up the pieces and relearn things pretty quickly if doors happen to close on you.
  - therandomguy 15y ago
    Highly specialized in facebook API? If you are a half decent developer you can easily pick up any API in few days if not in few hours.
    - deleted 15y ago
      [deleted]
    - chris_engel 15y ago
      Not on facebook. It feels like IE6 in development. About one billion pittfalls and the documentation is not helpful most of the time.
k-mcgrady 15y ago
Why was he banned? I can't seem to find the reason on the reddit page or the developers blog post.
- surfingdino 15y ago
  I can't find any additional info. If there was nothing wrong with the plugin for 18 months and now they're using all legal powers to intimidate him, I'd say someone got wind of money-making opportunity.
  - elliottcarlson 15y ago
    This is the first time I am reading about the plugin, but it seems to have automatically gone through a users timeline to find posts where their friends were sharing in-game items. While this may not have been cheating at the game, Facebook could possibly see the automated browsing as a circumvention of viewing their ads.
- MBCook 15y ago
  I've never heard of the plugin before, but it looks like it did some of the tedium of clicking on the game status updates for you. (If someone can give a good description, I would love to see it). My guess is that FB doesn't like the software doing this because it means the users aren't doing it themselves, and thus aren't able to see the ads they would have otherwise, cutting down on revenue. The only other reason I can think of that would make any sense is that the games servers might have had load issues (since the plugin could act faster and on more things than a human). However, I would put my ad theory above as far more likely.
  - cookiecaper 15y ago
    Facebook, like craigslist, has a history of extreme prejudice against any form of automation or scraping of its site. I think that your suggestion about ads is correct. Suppose one of these alternate interfaces took over a large chunk of the market. How would Facebook present any advertisement to these users? They'd have to go the twitter route and insert ads directly into feeds.
varenc 15y ago
Its important to note he was developing a browser extension and was not interacting with Facebook's exposed APIs.
zeratul 15y ago
Here is a snippet from Friendly Gaming Simplifier Message Board: On the day of 6th January 2012 02:05 GMT+1, I have received a legal note from Perkins Coie attorney company, which is representing Facebook Inc., based in Menlo Park, California. According to this note I must follow all of the below demands „In order to avoid further escalation of this matter”: - Stop offering the FGS Browser Software, or any other software that interferes with Facebook’s intended limitations or impairs the proper working of Facebook, - I must cease and not access the Facebook site(s) and/or services for any reason whatsoever. I cannot find explanation why he got this message.
- surfingdino 15y ago
  It doesn't look like they provided any explanation, just gave a "fair" warning, "In order to avoid further escalation of this matter."
josefrichter 15y ago
limits his chances of finding employment as a programmer?? Why exactly? Facebook API is st and no good programmer wants to develop on top of it.
- kaonashi 15y ago
  No good programmer wants to, but does so anyways because of Facebook's marketing potential.
- noarchy 15y ago
  Want isn't the same as "need" here. People will pay you to develop apps with FB integration. That's enough to sway plenty of developers.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
bennytjia 15y ago
I would hire him
- bennytjia 15y ago
  The fact that 1. a developer could create a working product that is live and used by a lot of users. 2. a developer could create something that draws a significant attention from a huge company like facebook since it turns out that the product has significant impact that it's actually all over the news when facebook tries to limit it. These to me would not be a strong reason for hurting a chance of employment. On the other hand, this is the kind of developer you want to work with.
  - surfingdino 15y ago
    These things can bite you when you least expect them. Say you hired him to write a web app and later on the users (or investors, or clients) want to have FB login. Now you need to fire the guy or separate him from the FB login implementation, testing, and use. The guy's got a huge target mark on his ass.
    - emc11 15y ago
      Maybe I'm missing something, but generally when doing any type of Facebook/social integration type work, I'm not using my personal account, but rather one dedicated to that purpose (i.e. the client's). How in the world would Facebook know (big brother, tin foil hats, etc. etc.) if this guy is running API calls and send in their secret police? It seems incredibly unlikely to me that, by working through a client (or even a fake profile) and taking part in the thousands++ API calls that occur daily, that there would be any issue here.
    - fleitz 15y ago
      No it's just a cease and desist letter, even if he did comply its not a binding agreement. And even if he did agree facebooks systems are so automated that he would likely recieve an invite to use their systems which would nullify the ban. People banned from casinos often receive invitations to visit the casino which nullify the ban via the casinos marketing efforts.
anothermachine 15y ago
He wasn't "banned for life". He received a "cease and desist" letter from Facebook's lawyer that threatened (bluffed) to escalate their challenge against the game. It's classic scare tactic employed by lawyers for unethical clients.
- surfingdino 15y ago
  He quotes "I must cease and not access the Facebook site(s) and/or services for any reason whatsoever." There is not EOL date in his statement.
  - chc 15y ago
    It's not the "for life" anothermachine is disputing, it's the "banned." What he received sounds like a simple nastygram. I could send you a letter demanding that you give me your house, but that wouldn't mean that you are obliged to do so.
    - surfingdino 15y ago
      He's not a US citizen, he doesn't have funds to fight Facebook and he cannot count on the lawyers to help him for free. They used disproportionate force against him. I'm sure he will remember that lesson.
      - beedogs 15y ago
        If he's not a US citizen and he isn't in the US, what's he got to lose by continuing to distribute the plugin? Any judgement against him would be pretty much pointless.
    - Natsu 15y ago
      > I could send you a letter demanding that you give me your house, but that wouldn't mean that you are obliged to do so. Considering that his only two choices are to leave voluntarily or to be forced out and that Facebook can take down his Facebook pages or ban his IPs on their own, I'm not sure what point there is in arguing over whether or not being given that choice qualifies as being "banned."
joe_the_user 15y ago
Hmm, There is a little more on this here: http://blog.games.com/2012/01/06/facebook-friendly-gaming-simplifier-cease-desist/ http://blog.games.com/2012/01/06/facebook-friendly-gaming-si... "...the plug-in had racked up an impressive following of players "in-the-know," who kept the project a secret for fear of such an outcome..." Maybe such a plugin shouldn't be disallowed by Facebook but it seems like it wasn't surprising to many people that it was...
ig1 15y ago
Facebook terms of usage https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms Section 3.2: "You will not collect users' content or information, or otherwise access Facebook, using automated means (such as harvesting bots, robots, spiders, or scrapers) without our permission." Seems writing a bot that automatically takes actions on a user's behalf would clearly violate the Facebook terms. Banning bots is perfectly reasonable behaviour for any site, a badly written bot, especially one that's distributed to large numbers of users could very easily cause a denial-of-service attack because of sloppy programming. Facebook probably should have just dropped the developer a friendly email rather than a letter from their lawyers and banning the developer might be going over-far, but there's nothing wrong with them wanting to ban the plugin.
- jfoutz 15y ago
  Just to be picky, wouldn't the users of the plugin be responsible for violating the tos? I'm sure he tests his plugin on facebook, so, bam. gone. but... shouldn't the 135,000 fans who (presumably) use his browser plugin be banned as well? They are clearly violating the tos.
  - icebraining 15y ago
    Well, a ToS is not law, so there's no obligation to enforce it, so it's up to FB to decide, and I don't see what would they gain from that. They got the app gone, they don't really benefit from having 135000 more people hating them.
    - jfoutz 15y ago
      IANAL, Is that true? I thought if a company made claims like that, they sort of had to do stuff about it. it seems like the dev could show, here's hundreds of thousands of other people doing exactly the same thing, why single him out? I think those tos claims are more use-it-or-lose-it kinds of rules.
      - ig1 15y ago
sdizdar 15y ago
I have a question which is more legal related. It is "public" secret that US government (and other governments) have and use persona management softwares which clearly violate Facebook terms of usage. The question is: does Facebook has any legal standing against that? Can Facebook or other social networks sue government for offering private intelligence companies contracts to create software to manage "fake people"?
- dangrossman 15y ago
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity_in_the_Unite...
shortformblog 15y ago
This sounds very similar to the Missing e situation that Tumblr users are facing: http://shortformblog.tumblr.com/post/15046201810/missing-e-tumblr-message http://shortformblog.tumblr.com/post/15046201810/missing-e-t... Essentially a plugin got really popular to the point where it was starting to cause problems. Tumblr hasn't gone so far as to get lawyers involved, however, but they have put a message up for regular users of the plugin, suggesting they turn it off.
lazerwalker 15y ago
What's really funny about telling him he's not allowed to use any Facebook services is that, short of blocking all connections between his computer and Facebook's servers, he can't. Even if he never goes to facebook.com again, he'll still encounter Like buttons and other FB social plugins on many, many sites.
feralchimp 15y ago
1. FB's lawyers sent him a letter asking him to stop. No more, no less. 2. Being 'banned from FB' is not really a legally defined classification for human beings, and HR organizations are paid to care about actual legal reality. 3. If he's not using FB APIs or other licensed information, how are FB's options for "further escalation" anything more than a louder brand of saber rattling? All it takes is one good lawyer looking to stand up to Goliath pro-bono, in a case that we know would be very highly publicized, and suddenly all the downside to a court battle is on FB's end. On what legal theory could FB hope to receive damages? 4. Despite all of the above, sometimes knuckling under and running for cover is the right move. A good programmer knows his limitations, and he's under no obligation to stick his neck out.
- DanBC 15y ago
  > On what legal theory could FB hope to receive damages? Possibly: Increased costs of support to 130,000 people using unapproved software in combination to Facebook, who get weird results from the software when Facebook updates something and blame Facebook not the software, and who bitch and moan to Facebook for support? (Obviously most people don't bother with support, and they just complain to friends.)
- fauigerzigerk 15y ago
  The problem with real life David v Goliath cases is the disproportionate distribution of risk. An individual losing a court battle against a big coroporation may leave him (and possibly his family) financially crippled for the rest of his life. That's why civil law is a complete farce. In this particular case I see very little justification for even trying to play David in spite of Facebook's grotesque overreaction.
neworbit 15y ago
OK, so where's the source ;)
- atesti 15y ago
  Here: http://code.google.com/p/fgs/source/checkout http://code.google.com/p/fgs/source/checkout
flexterra 15y ago
What about all the Like buttons everywhere?
- eridius 15y ago
  It's the Facebook subreddit, that's a custom style set on that subreddit. The like buttons are actually reedit upvote buttons.
  - chuffindiesel 15y ago
    All the info regards the FB v FGS fiasco can be found here; https://www.facebook.com/help/community/question/?id=1911115&ref=notif&notif_t=answers_answered https://www.facebook.com/help/community/question/?id=1911115... https://www.petitionbuzz.com/petitions/savefgs https://www.petitionbuzz.com/petitions/savefgs http://www.zdnet.com/tb/1-112687#1_112687_2285681 http://www.zdnet.com/tb/1-112687#1_112687_2285681 http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-728485 http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-728485 http://thedailyattack.com/2012/01/07/facebook-intimidates-developer-bans-him-and-his-code-for-life/ http://thedailyattack.com/2012/01/07/facebook-intimidates-de... https://www.facebook.com/pages/Support-Arkadiusz-flies-RzadkowolskiCreator-of-FGS/273823565972663?sk=wall https://www.facebook.com/pages/Support-Arkadiusz-flies-Rzadk... http://www.zdnet.com/blog/facebook/facebook-bans-browser-plugin-fgs-and-its-developer/6955 http://www.zdnet.com/blog/facebook/facebook-bans-browser-plu... http://journalxtra.com/games/facebook-bully-fgs-cease-desist-notice-fb-lawyers-4580 http://journalxtra.com/games/facebook-bully-fgs-cease-desist... http://facebookkit.com/facebook-bans-browser-plugin-fgs-and-its-developer/ http://facebookkit.com/facebook-bans-browser-plugin-fgs-and-... http://rddweb.com/fgs-facebook-zynga/ http://rddweb.com/fgs-facebook-zynga/ http://blog.games.com/2012/01/06/facebook-friendly-gaming-simplifier-cease-desist/ http://blog.games.com/2012/01/06/facebook-friendly-gaming-si... http://www.sims-social.com/2012/01/help-save-fgs.html http://www.sims-social.com/2012/01/help-save-fgs.html http://www.ixwebhosting.mobi/facebook-disable-plug-ins-more-than-27000-users-fgs-petition-to-retain/ http://www.ixwebhosting.mobi/facebook-disable-plug-ins-more-... http://www.cityvillechat.com/news/facebook-attacks-citizen/ http://www.cityvillechat.com/news/facebook-attacks-citizen/
    - 15y ago
baby 15y ago
I don't know if HN is that stupid... Here's my story. I made a facebook website using their API in a bad way. EXACTLY like this story, that guy knew he was using facebook's API in bad way. I got 100.000 fans on my facebook app and then they closed it, banned me domain and banned me from using the API again. It doesn't mean I'm banned from using their API again... they're saying a lot of things they don't do... and it doesn't mean also that I can't work for a company that need a facebook developer (and that would be a shitty job). sorry for my english I'm french. but this article is sensationalism !
BIGGIRLSDONTCRY 15y ago
I NEED HELP FINDING OUT ABOUT SOMEONE WHO HAS BEEN PLAYING A PRETTY NASTY GAME WITH ME, IS ANYONE WILLING TO HELP?
Kriegar 15y ago
Apparently, FGS was banned because one lone game developer made it a point to complain. This particular browser extension was both the least intrusive, and smoothest working, of its' kind. The developer also worked WITH the game developers. so that this extension worked in a way that the game developers agreed to. The myriad explanations as to "why" this happened can be found in these two articles, at the least, and in the comments to them. http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-727662 http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-727662 http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-728485 http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-728485 For those who seem to believe that this was anything other than an UNREASONABLE action on the part of Facebook, I suggest that the only way to make REASONABLE would be to enjoin other, BIGGER programs that do what this one did and more. Programs that allow you to do things that one CANNOT do in-game, which is not something this browser extension did.
ginacogeasca 15y ago
Is not cheating definitively, this program is doing nothing else that collect from our walls, the items from the walls is free, so we don't have the possibility to collect stuff for which we suppose to pay... just collect the postings, if nobody took it before you...and with FGS, in 2 clicks you can collect hundreds...that's why all the ill people on Facebook was so in need of this program. For the people like me it was good, because when I come home after a whole day of work, I can collect item posted 12 hours before. And another wonderful thing which this FGS is doing, is that is receiving and sending back hundreds of gifts with 1 click. Having this wonderful FGS, we start to play 6-7 games, now without it, many of us are forced to quit playing and because many are on Facebook just for play, we'll close the Facebook accounts also. :(

172 points by surfingdino 15y ago

>but it also seriously limits his chances of finding employment as a programmer. That doesn't sound quite right. TOO HOT FOR FACEBOOK!!! could look great on the right résumé. The whole thing is just what we've come to expect from facebook by now tbh.

surfingdino 15y ago
I'd say it limits his chances of finding any employment where facebook is used for communication.
- elemeno 15y ago
  To my mind, that sounds like a good thing. My employer using Facebook for communication sounds just terrible.
  - zalew 15y ago
    not only terrible but irresponsible
ww520 15y ago
If that limits his chances of finding a programmer job, his talent is very limited.
- surfingdino 15y ago
  Employers often do background checks and if they find out he was banned by Facebook that may work against him.
  - cookiecaper 15y ago
    Background checks ping public records for things like convictions and residence history. There is no way a "ban from Facebook" would show up on one of these.
    - vectorpush 15y ago
      Background checks these days pretty typically include your name being googled, especially if it's in tech.
      - killerdark 15y ago
        No it doesn't. Source: Living in CA, had several Background checks (CA allows the subject to receive a copy of the background check).
  - ww520 15y ago
    How do employers find out the ban? I thought it's a private matter. Does Facebook have a list of all banned developers?
    - surfingdino 15y ago
      He published the info on the internet. Will be easy to find using Google.
      - ww520 15y ago
        So it's like he put it in his resume. I am sorry. I feel sorry for the guy, and I don't know whether Facebook is justified in banning him. But if Facebook doesn't want to play ball, just move on.
    - a_a_r_o_n 15y ago
      I found it and I wasn't even looking for it.
- Agathos 15y ago
  In the future, all restaurants are Taco Bell and all computer systems are Facebook.
  - joemoon 15y ago
    For anyone curious, this a reference to Demolition Man: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFiDoOgRTpk http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFiDoOgRTpk
k-mcgrady 15y ago
It could cause problems for him if the company he wants to work at uses the Facebook API. The work might be done through the company's account but the company may not want to risk Facebook finding out he is part of their team and shutting them down.
vectorpush 15y ago
True, but it does suck to be banned from the ubiquitous platform in which you've spent time becoming highly specialized. edit: Apparently he developed a browser plugin that doesn't use Facebook's API, so it looks like this may actually be a decent endorsement.
- qqqqqq 15y ago
  Yes it does. But programming is one of those nice fields where you can usually pick up the pieces and relearn things pretty quickly if doors happen to close on you.
- therandomguy 15y ago
  Highly specialized in facebook API? If you are a half decent developer you can easily pick up any API in few days if not in few hours.
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
  - chris_engel 15y ago
    Not on facebook. It feels like IE6 in development. About one billion pittfalls and the documentation is not helpful most of the time.

k-mcgrady 15y ago

Why was he banned? I can't seem to find the reason on the reddit page or the developers blog post.

surfingdino 15y ago
I can't find any additional info. If there was nothing wrong with the plugin for 18 months and now they're using all legal powers to intimidate him, I'd say someone got wind of money-making opportunity.
- elliottcarlson 15y ago
  This is the first time I am reading about the plugin, but it seems to have automatically gone through a users timeline to find posts where their friends were sharing in-game items. While this may not have been cheating at the game, Facebook could possibly see the automated browsing as a circumvention of viewing their ads.
MBCook 15y ago
I've never heard of the plugin before, but it looks like it did some of the tedium of clicking on the game status updates for you. (If someone can give a good description, I would love to see it). My guess is that FB doesn't like the software doing this because it means the users aren't doing it themselves, and thus aren't able to see the ads they would have otherwise, cutting down on revenue. The only other reason I can think of that would make any sense is that the games servers might have had load issues (since the plugin could act faster and on more things than a human). However, I would put my ad theory above as far more likely.
- cookiecaper 15y ago
  Facebook, like craigslist, has a history of extreme prejudice against any form of automation or scraping of its site. I think that your suggestion about ads is correct. Suppose one of these alternate interfaces took over a large chunk of the market. How would Facebook present any advertisement to these users? They'd have to go the twitter route and insert ads directly into feeds.

varenc 15y ago

Its important to note he was developing a browser extension and was not interacting with Facebook's exposed APIs.

zeratul 15y ago

Here is a snippet from Friendly Gaming Simplifier Message Board: On the day of 6th January 2012 02:05 GMT+1, I have received a legal note from Perkins Coie attorney company, which is representing Facebook Inc., based in Menlo Park, California. According to this note I must follow all of the below demands „In order to avoid further escalation of this matter”: - Stop offering the FGS Browser Software, or any other software that interferes with Facebook’s intended limitations or impairs the proper working of Facebook, - I must cease and not access the Facebook site(s) and/or services for any reason whatsoever. I cannot find explanation why he got this message.

surfingdino 15y ago
It doesn't look like they provided any explanation, just gave a "fair" warning, "In order to avoid further escalation of this matter."

josefrichter 15y ago

limits his chances of finding employment as a programmer?? Why exactly? Facebook API is st and no good programmer wants to develop on top of it.

kaonashi 15y ago
No good programmer wants to, but does so anyways because of Facebook's marketing potential.
noarchy 15y ago
Want isn't the same as "need" here. People will pay you to develop apps with FB integration. That's enough to sway plenty of developers.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]

bennytjia 15y ago

I would hire him

bennytjia 15y ago
The fact that 1. a developer could create a working product that is live and used by a lot of users. 2. a developer could create something that draws a significant attention from a huge company like facebook since it turns out that the product has significant impact that it's actually all over the news when facebook tries to limit it. These to me would not be a strong reason for hurting a chance of employment. On the other hand, this is the kind of developer you want to work with.
- surfingdino 15y ago
  These things can bite you when you least expect them. Say you hired him to write a web app and later on the users (or investors, or clients) want to have FB login. Now you need to fire the guy or separate him from the FB login implementation, testing, and use. The guy's got a huge target mark on his ass.
  - emc11 15y ago
    Maybe I'm missing something, but generally when doing any type of Facebook/social integration type work, I'm not using my personal account, but rather one dedicated to that purpose (i.e. the client's). How in the world would Facebook know (big brother, tin foil hats, etc. etc.) if this guy is running API calls and send in their secret police? It seems incredibly unlikely to me that, by working through a client (or even a fake profile) and taking part in the thousands++ API calls that occur daily, that there would be any issue here.
  - fleitz 15y ago
    No it's just a cease and desist letter, even if he did comply its not a binding agreement. And even if he did agree facebooks systems are so automated that he would likely recieve an invite to use their systems which would nullify the ban. People banned from casinos often receive invitations to visit the casino which nullify the ban via the casinos marketing efforts.

anothermachine 15y ago

He wasn't "banned for life". He received a "cease and desist" letter from Facebook's lawyer that threatened (bluffed) to escalate their challenge against the game. It's classic scare tactic employed by lawyers for unethical clients.

surfingdino 15y ago
He quotes "I must cease and not access the Facebook site(s) and/or services for any reason whatsoever." There is not EOL date in his statement.
- chc 15y ago
  It's not the "for life" anothermachine is disputing, it's the "banned." What he received sounds like a simple nastygram. I could send you a letter demanding that you give me your house, but that wouldn't mean that you are obliged to do so.
  - surfingdino 15y ago
    He's not a US citizen, he doesn't have funds to fight Facebook and he cannot count on the lawyers to help him for free. They used disproportionate force against him. I'm sure he will remember that lesson.
    - beedogs 15y ago
      If he's not a US citizen and he isn't in the US, what's he got to lose by continuing to distribute the plugin? Any judgement against him would be pretty much pointless.
  - Natsu 15y ago
    > I could send you a letter demanding that you give me your house, but that wouldn't mean that you are obliged to do so. Considering that his only two choices are to leave voluntarily or to be forced out and that Facebook can take down his Facebook pages or ban his IPs on their own, I'm not sure what point there is in arguing over whether or not being given that choice qualifies as being "banned."

joe_the_user 15y ago

Hmm, There is a little more on this here: http://blog.games.com/2012/01/06/facebook-friendly-gaming-simplifier-cease-desist/ http://blog.games.com/2012/01/06/facebook-friendly-gaming-si... "...the plug-in had racked up an impressive following of players "in-the-know," who kept the project a secret for fear of such an outcome..." Maybe such a plugin shouldn't be disallowed by Facebook but it seems like it wasn't surprising to many people that it was...

ig1 15y ago

Facebook terms of usage https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms Section 3.2: "You will not collect users' content or information, or otherwise access Facebook, using automated means (such as harvesting bots, robots, spiders, or scrapers) without our permission." Seems writing a bot that automatically takes actions on a user's behalf would clearly violate the Facebook terms. Banning bots is perfectly reasonable behaviour for any site, a badly written bot, especially one that's distributed to large numbers of users could very easily cause a denial-of-service attack because of sloppy programming. Facebook probably should have just dropped the developer a friendly email rather than a letter from their lawyers and banning the developer might be going over-far, but there's nothing wrong with them wanting to ban the plugin.

jfoutz 15y ago
Just to be picky, wouldn't the users of the plugin be responsible for violating the tos? I'm sure he tests his plugin on facebook, so, bam. gone. but... shouldn't the 135,000 fans who (presumably) use his browser plugin be banned as well? They are clearly violating the tos.
- icebraining 15y ago
  Well, a ToS is not law, so there's no obligation to enforce it, so it's up to FB to decide, and I don't see what would they gain from that. They got the app gone, they don't really benefit from having 135000 more people hating them.
  - jfoutz 15y ago
    IANAL, Is that true? I thought if a company made claims like that, they sort of had to do stuff about it. it seems like the dev could show, here's hundreds of thousands of other people doing exactly the same thing, why single him out? I think those tos claims are more use-it-or-lose-it kinds of rules.
    - ig1 15y ago

sdizdar 15y ago

I have a question which is more legal related. It is "public" secret that US government (and other governments) have and use persona management softwares which clearly violate Facebook terms of usage. The question is: does Facebook has any legal standing against that? Can Facebook or other social networks sue government for offering private intelligence companies contracts to create software to manage "fake people"?

dangrossman 15y ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity_in_the_Unite...

shortformblog 15y ago

This sounds very similar to the Missing e situation that Tumblr users are facing: http://shortformblog.tumblr.com/post/15046201810/missing-e-tumblr-message http://shortformblog.tumblr.com/post/15046201810/missing-e-t... Essentially a plugin got really popular to the point where it was starting to cause problems. Tumblr hasn't gone so far as to get lawyers involved, however, but they have put a message up for regular users of the plugin, suggesting they turn it off.

lazerwalker 15y ago

What's really funny about telling him he's not allowed to use any Facebook services is that, short of blocking all connections between his computer and Facebook's servers, he can't. Even if he never goes to facebook.com again, he'll still encounter Like buttons and other FB social plugins on many, many sites.

feralchimp 15y ago

1. FB's lawyers sent him a letter asking him to stop. No more, no less. 2. Being 'banned from FB' is not really a legally defined classification for human beings, and HR organizations are paid to care about actual legal reality. 3. If he's not using FB APIs or other licensed information, how are FB's options for "further escalation" anything more than a louder brand of saber rattling? All it takes is one good lawyer looking to stand up to Goliath pro-bono, in a case that we know would be very highly publicized, and suddenly all the downside to a court battle is on FB's end. On what legal theory could FB hope to receive damages? 4. Despite all of the above, sometimes knuckling under and running for cover is the right move. A good programmer knows his limitations, and he's under no obligation to stick his neck out.

DanBC 15y ago
> On what legal theory could FB hope to receive damages? Possibly: Increased costs of support to 130,000 people using unapproved software in combination to Facebook, who get weird results from the software when Facebook updates something and blame Facebook not the software, and who bitch and moan to Facebook for support? (Obviously most people don't bother with support, and they just complain to friends.)
fauigerzigerk 15y ago
The problem with real life David v Goliath cases is the disproportionate distribution of risk. An individual losing a court battle against a big coroporation may leave him (and possibly his family) financially crippled for the rest of his life. That's why civil law is a complete farce. In this particular case I see very little justification for even trying to play David in spite of Facebook's grotesque overreaction.

neworbit 15y ago

OK, so where's the source ;)

atesti 15y ago
Here: http://code.google.com/p/fgs/source/checkout http://code.google.com/p/fgs/source/checkout

flexterra 15y ago

What about all the Like buttons everywhere?

eridius 15y ago
It's the Facebook subreddit, that's a custom style set on that subreddit. The like buttons are actually reedit upvote buttons.
- chuffindiesel 15y ago
  All the info regards the FB v FGS fiasco can be found here; https://www.facebook.com/help/community/question/?id=1911115&ref=notif&notif_t=answers_answered https://www.facebook.com/help/community/question/?id=1911115... https://www.petitionbuzz.com/petitions/savefgs https://www.petitionbuzz.com/petitions/savefgs http://www.zdnet.com/tb/1-112687#1_112687_2285681 http://www.zdnet.com/tb/1-112687#1_112687_2285681 http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-728485 http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-728485 http://thedailyattack.com/2012/01/07/facebook-intimidates-developer-bans-him-and-his-code-for-life/ http://thedailyattack.com/2012/01/07/facebook-intimidates-de... https://www.facebook.com/pages/Support-Arkadiusz-flies-RzadkowolskiCreator-of-FGS/273823565972663?sk=wall https://www.facebook.com/pages/Support-Arkadiusz-flies-Rzadk... http://www.zdnet.com/blog/facebook/facebook-bans-browser-plugin-fgs-and-its-developer/6955 http://www.zdnet.com/blog/facebook/facebook-bans-browser-plu... http://journalxtra.com/games/facebook-bully-fgs-cease-desist-notice-fb-lawyers-4580 http://journalxtra.com/games/facebook-bully-fgs-cease-desist... http://facebookkit.com/facebook-bans-browser-plugin-fgs-and-its-developer/ http://facebookkit.com/facebook-bans-browser-plugin-fgs-and-... http://rddweb.com/fgs-facebook-zynga/ http://rddweb.com/fgs-facebook-zynga/ http://blog.games.com/2012/01/06/facebook-friendly-gaming-simplifier-cease-desist/ http://blog.games.com/2012/01/06/facebook-friendly-gaming-si... http://www.sims-social.com/2012/01/help-save-fgs.html http://www.sims-social.com/2012/01/help-save-fgs.html http://www.ixwebhosting.mobi/facebook-disable-plug-ins-more-than-27000-users-fgs-petition-to-retain/ http://www.ixwebhosting.mobi/facebook-disable-plug-ins-more-... http://www.cityvillechat.com/news/facebook-attacks-citizen/ http://www.cityvillechat.com/news/facebook-attacks-citizen/
  - 15y ago

baby 15y ago

I don't know if HN is that stupid... Here's my story. I made a facebook website using their API in a bad way. EXACTLY like this story, that guy knew he was using facebook's API in bad way. I got 100.000 fans on my facebook app and then they closed it, banned me domain and banned me from using the API again. It doesn't mean I'm banned from using their API again... they're saying a lot of things they don't do... and it doesn't mean also that I can't work for a company that need a facebook developer (and that would be a shitty job). sorry for my english I'm french. but this article is sensationalism !

BIGGIRLSDONTCRY 15y ago

I NEED HELP FINDING OUT ABOUT SOMEONE WHO HAS BEEN PLAYING A PRETTY NASTY GAME WITH ME, IS ANYONE WILLING TO HELP?

Kriegar 15y ago

Apparently, FGS was banned because one lone game developer made it a point to complain. This particular browser extension was both the least intrusive, and smoothest working, of its' kind. The developer also worked WITH the game developers. so that this extension worked in a way that the game developers agreed to. The myriad explanations as to "why" this happened can be found in these two articles, at the least, and in the comments to them. http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-727662 http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-727662 http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-728485 http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-728485 For those who seem to believe that this was anything other than an UNREASONABLE action on the part of Facebook, I suggest that the only way to make REASONABLE would be to enjoin other, BIGGER programs that do what this one did and more. Programs that allow you to do things that one CANNOT do in-game, which is not something this browser extension did.

ginacogeasca 15y ago

Is not cheating definitively, this program is doing nothing else that collect from our walls, the items from the walls is free, so we don't have the possibility to collect stuff for which we suppose to pay... just collect the postings, if nobody took it before you...and with FGS, in 2 clicks you can collect hundreds...that's why all the ill people on Facebook was so in need of this program. For the people like me it was good, because when I come home after a whole day of work, I can collect item posted 12 hours before. And another wonderful thing which this FGS is doing, is that is receiving and sending back hundreds of gifts with 1 click. Having this wonderful FGS, we start to play 6-7 games, now without it, many of us are forced to quit playing and because many are on Facebook just for play, we'll close the Facebook accounts also. :(