5 ms·

I think one of the messages here is that if you're a start-up and your product requires a third-party API that you have no control over to function then you're

by objclxt 14y ago

I think one of the messages here is that if you're a start-up and your product requires a third-party API that you have no control over to function then you're taking a massive risk. This isn't specific to Linked.In: API access isn't a right. If your product requires a third-party data source and you don't have any contractual agreement with that third-party you have to accept that the rug could be yanked from under your feet at any moment. And maybe that risk is acceptable to you and your investors - but to not have a backup plan is foolish.

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
legutierr 14y ago
But what about all of those software businesses that have built on top of the iOS API + App Store? Would you say that they are also taking a massive risk? Apple can cut off any app that it wants at any time, almost for any reason, and yet thousands of independent developers are building profitable businesses on top of their platform. The issue is not a dependency on an API or platform. The issue is the nature and character of the company upon which you are depending. In spite of some well-publicized hiccups, Apple has made an effort to nurture its developer community. The point of the article is not that dependency is bad (although it may very well be), but rather that LinkedIn is a bad partner, and it's not worth spending any effort to build a business on their platform. What I'm curious about is what companies are similarly risky to build your business on.
- balloot 14y ago
  It's not that complicated. If you build your company on the back of another company you must abide by their TOS. If your business plan is to build the best porn app on the App Store, you would be similarly disappointed. In general, if your business plan relies on the goodwill of another company and you provide little value to that company in return, you don't have a very good business plan.
  - legutierr 14y ago
    I don't think it's enough to rely on the TOS. Sure, there are obvious examples like porn on the iPhone where the TOS will give you a clear answer. Frequently, however, the TOS are ambiguous and are interpreted inconsistently. They can also be changed at will. Sure, you're right that developers should try to give as much benefit back to their platform provider as they derive from the platform. But the fact is that different companies perceive benefit in different ways with reasoning that is opaque. Often a decision can depend on a strategic direction for the firm that you are not privy to. All this is why the reputation of the company matters so much. From reading the article, it looks like LinkedIn not only acted in a very inconsistent manner--giving praise before shutting them down--but they even began reverse-engineering the application. That's not the kind of behavior that breeds a healthy ecosystem regardless of whether they have all the right to act that way, and regardless of whether Pealk was careless in relying so heavily on LinkedIn. If everyone were to take a cautious approach to the APIs and platforms that big companies offer, as has been suggested in this thread, then the tech sector would be a much less interesting place. The fact is that a lot of innovation happens because there actually are API and platform providers out there that care about their developers and won't pull shit like this.
    - balloot 14y ago
      You're complicating something that isn't that complicated. LinkedIn's TOS very clearly states in the terms that it is illegal to "Use the APIs in an Application that competes with products or services offered by us" So when you see: http://talent.linkedin.com/Recruiter http://talent.linkedin.com/Recruiter And your site is using the API to create a service for recruiters, it seems crystal clear to me that you are violating the LinkedIn TOS. This is not some grey area or some arbitrary changing of the rules - it is a very clear violation of LinkedIn API guidelines. I just don't see how this proves even a little bit that LinkedIn doesn't "care about their developers". And for the bigger picture, it is amazing to me that a significant number of people expect LinkedIn to sit around while some other company attempts to undercut LinkedIn's own premium product using LinkedIn's API.
- JohnQPasserby 14y ago
  Businesses that are building their success on the app store are taking a massive risk, yes.
- mcantelon 14y ago
  >But what about all of those software businesses that have built on top of the iOS API + App Store? Would you say that they are also taking a massive risk? Yes. If Apple wants to offer a product with similar functionality to yours they can make your disappear. Sharecropping is inherently risky.
- janardanyri 14y ago
  > But what about all of those software businesses that have built on top of the iOS API + App Store? Would you say that they are also taking a massive risk? Yes. Very yes. Any iOS developer with any sense is brutally aware that we serve at the pleasure of the king, as Jeff Atwood put it. Apple nurtures its developer community because a robust app store is a selling point for Apple hardware. If Apple decides your app runs contrary to Apple's goals, it's gone, and you better have a backup plan. There've been plenty of panicked anecdotes floating around the Internet on that topic. The grandparent's analysis is sound. (Also: thousands of independent developers are building profitable businesses on iOS, but tens of thousands aren't.)
- bconway 14y ago
  But what about all of those software businesses that have built on top of the iOS API + App Store? Would you say that they are also taking a massive risk? Yes, without question. Business doing so should at the very least diversify across platforms and technologies.
lovskogen 14y ago
Like Padmapper.
djt 14y ago
With all the hype about Lean Startup and Agile etc I think it would be worthwhile going over a simple SWOT analysis for a lot of these built-on-API companies. If you're going to use an API then you need to create a business that will survive when you get big enough for the company to realise you're a threat and buy you or bankrupt you.
ExpiredLink 14y ago
Tim Bray: Are You a Sharecropper? http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/07/12/WebsThePlace http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/07/12/WebsThePla...
arturadib 14y ago
And, this case is singular in that not only do they depend on the API, they are also in direct competition with the provider of the API. It's risk^2.

by objclxt 14y ago

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

legutierr 14y ago

But what about all of those software businesses that have built on top of the iOS API + App Store? Would you say that they are also taking a massive risk? Apple can cut off any app that it wants at any time, almost for any reason, and yet thousands of independent developers are building profitable businesses on top of their platform. The issue is not a dependency on an API or platform. The issue is the nature and character of the company upon which you are depending. In spite of some well-publicized hiccups, Apple has made an effort to nurture its developer community. The point of the article is not that dependency is bad (although it may very well be), but rather that LinkedIn is a bad partner, and it's not worth spending any effort to build a business on their platform. What I'm curious about is what companies are similarly risky to build your business on.

balloot 14y ago
It's not that complicated. If you build your company on the back of another company you must abide by their TOS. If your business plan is to build the best porn app on the App Store, you would be similarly disappointed. In general, if your business plan relies on the goodwill of another company and you provide little value to that company in return, you don't have a very good business plan.
- legutierr 14y ago
  I don't think it's enough to rely on the TOS. Sure, there are obvious examples like porn on the iPhone where the TOS will give you a clear answer. Frequently, however, the TOS are ambiguous and are interpreted inconsistently. They can also be changed at will. Sure, you're right that developers should try to give as much benefit back to their platform provider as they derive from the platform. But the fact is that different companies perceive benefit in different ways with reasoning that is opaque. Often a decision can depend on a strategic direction for the firm that you are not privy to. All this is why the reputation of the company matters so much. From reading the article, it looks like LinkedIn not only acted in a very inconsistent manner--giving praise before shutting them down--but they even began reverse-engineering the application. That's not the kind of behavior that breeds a healthy ecosystem regardless of whether they have all the right to act that way, and regardless of whether Pealk was careless in relying so heavily on LinkedIn. If everyone were to take a cautious approach to the APIs and platforms that big companies offer, as has been suggested in this thread, then the tech sector would be a much less interesting place. The fact is that a lot of innovation happens because there actually are API and platform providers out there that care about their developers and won't pull shit like this.
  - balloot 14y ago
    You're complicating something that isn't that complicated. LinkedIn's TOS very clearly states in the terms that it is illegal to "Use the APIs in an Application that competes with products or services offered by us" So when you see: http://talent.linkedin.com/Recruiter http://talent.linkedin.com/Recruiter And your site is using the API to create a service for recruiters, it seems crystal clear to me that you are violating the LinkedIn TOS. This is not some grey area or some arbitrary changing of the rules - it is a very clear violation of LinkedIn API guidelines. I just don't see how this proves even a little bit that LinkedIn doesn't "care about their developers". And for the bigger picture, it is amazing to me that a significant number of people expect LinkedIn to sit around while some other company attempts to undercut LinkedIn's own premium product using LinkedIn's API.
JohnQPasserby 14y ago
Businesses that are building their success on the app store are taking a massive risk, yes.
mcantelon 14y ago
>But what about all of those software businesses that have built on top of the iOS API + App Store? Would you say that they are also taking a massive risk? Yes. If Apple wants to offer a product with similar functionality to yours they can make your disappear. Sharecropping is inherently risky.
janardanyri 14y ago
> But what about all of those software businesses that have built on top of the iOS API + App Store? Would you say that they are also taking a massive risk? Yes. Very yes. Any iOS developer with any sense is brutally aware that we serve at the pleasure of the king, as Jeff Atwood put it. Apple nurtures its developer community because a robust app store is a selling point for Apple hardware. If Apple decides your app runs contrary to Apple's goals, it's gone, and you better have a backup plan. There've been plenty of panicked anecdotes floating around the Internet on that topic. The grandparent's analysis is sound. (Also: thousands of independent developers are building profitable businesses on iOS, but tens of thousands aren't.)
bconway 14y ago
But what about all of those software businesses that have built on top of the iOS API + App Store? Would you say that they are also taking a massive risk? Yes, without question. Business doing so should at the very least diversify across platforms and technologies.

lovskogen 14y ago

Like Padmapper.

djt 14y ago

With all the hype about Lean Startup and Agile etc I think it would be worthwhile going over a simple SWOT analysis for a lot of these built-on-API companies. If you're going to use an API then you need to create a business that will survive when you get big enough for the company to realise you're a threat and buy you or bankrupt you.

ExpiredLink 14y ago

Tim Bray: Are You a Sharecropper? http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/07/12/WebsThePlace http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/07/12/WebsThePla...

arturadib 14y ago

And, this case is singular in that not only do they depend on the API, they are also in direct competition with the provider of the API. It's risk^2.