6 ms·

There is EU law protecting interoperability projects (2009/24/ec) also Haier should be reported for anticompetitive behavior

tzs 3y ago
I have not read 2009/24/ec in great detail, but skimming it plus reading Wikipedia's description of it suggests that it is about copyright. Haier Europe's main complaint was with the Home Assistant plugin's use of APIs running on Haier's servers. That's not a copyright issue, and so appears to be out of scope for 2009/24/ec.
- close04 3y ago
  > Haier claims these plugins cause the firm significant financial damage and violate copyright laws Haier issued the takedown notice specifically on copyright grounds. Google and Oracle already battled this one out, and it was decided that using an API is fair use. This is probably the rule of thumb now barring exceptional cases.
  - tzs 3y ago
    > Haier issued the takedown notice specifically on copyright grounds From the original letter they sent [1]: >> We are writing to inform you that we have discovered two Home Assistant integration plug-ins developed by you (https://github.com/Andre0512/hon https://github.com/Andre0512/hon and https://github.com/Andre0512/pyhOn https://github.com/Andre0512/pyhOn) that are in violation of our terms of service. Specifically, the plug-ins are using our services in an unauthorized manner which is causing significant economic harm to our Company. From their subsequent correspondence also shown on that page: >> Recently, we've observed a substantial increase in AWS calls attributed to your plugin, prompting the communication you previously received as standard protocol for our company, This is true: > Google and Oracle already battled this one out, and it was decided that using an API is fair use but not really relevant here. It just means that if you copy someone else's API that is not a copyright issue. It does not mean you have permission to call an implementation of that API that is running on their servers. That is out of scope as far as copyright goes. [1] https://github.com/Andre0512/hon/blob/main/takedown_faq.md https://github.com/Andre0512/hon/blob/main/takedown_faq.md
    - buran77 3y ago
      You cut the quote a bit short. It goes on to say: > We take the protection of our intellectual property very seriously The copyright implication is clear, even if probably it's just being used because copyright complaints are overpowered (right up there with terrorist/pedophile). Their real complaint is "it costs us money".
- actionfromafar 3y ago
  I think so too, but regularly people try to make APIs about copyright too. Java comes to mind, don’t remember the details.
  - circuit10 3y ago
    A remote API that goes through someone else’s servers at their cost is a bit different though
    - actionfromafar 3y ago
      Doesn't make it copyright IMHO.
      - circuit10 3y ago
        I’m saying it’s not a copyright issue but an issue of using a service without permission. A legal threat seems too heavy handed in this case but it does make sense that doing that would be illegal in general

tzs 3y ago

I have not read 2009/24/ec in great detail, but skimming it plus reading Wikipedia's description of it suggests that it is about copyright. Haier Europe's main complaint was with the Home Assistant plugin's use of APIs running on Haier's servers. That's not a copyright issue, and so appears to be out of scope for 2009/24/ec.

close04 3y ago
> Haier claims these plugins cause the firm significant financial damage and violate copyright laws Haier issued the takedown notice specifically on copyright grounds. Google and Oracle already battled this one out, and it was decided that using an API is fair use. This is probably the rule of thumb now barring exceptional cases.
- tzs 3y ago
  > Haier issued the takedown notice specifically on copyright grounds From the original letter they sent [1]: >> We are writing to inform you that we have discovered two Home Assistant integration plug-ins developed by you (https://github.com/Andre0512/hon https://github.com/Andre0512/hon and https://github.com/Andre0512/pyhOn https://github.com/Andre0512/pyhOn) that are in violation of our terms of service. Specifically, the plug-ins are using our services in an unauthorized manner which is causing significant economic harm to our Company. From their subsequent correspondence also shown on that page: >> Recently, we've observed a substantial increase in AWS calls attributed to your plugin, prompting the communication you previously received as standard protocol for our company, This is true: > Google and Oracle already battled this one out, and it was decided that using an API is fair use but not really relevant here. It just means that if you copy someone else's API that is not a copyright issue. It does not mean you have permission to call an implementation of that API that is running on their servers. That is out of scope as far as copyright goes. [1] https://github.com/Andre0512/hon/blob/main/takedown_faq.md https://github.com/Andre0512/hon/blob/main/takedown_faq.md
  - buran77 3y ago
    You cut the quote a bit short. It goes on to say: > We take the protection of our intellectual property very seriously The copyright implication is clear, even if probably it's just being used because copyright complaints are overpowered (right up there with terrorist/pedophile). Their real complaint is "it costs us money".
actionfromafar 3y ago
I think so too, but regularly people try to make APIs about copyright too. Java comes to mind, don’t remember the details.
- circuit10 3y ago
  A remote API that goes through someone else’s servers at their cost is a bit different though
  - actionfromafar 3y ago
    Doesn't make it copyright IMHO.
    - circuit10 3y ago
      I’m saying it’s not a copyright issue but an issue of using a service without permission. A legal threat seems too heavy handed in this case but it does make sense that doing that would be illegal in general