8 ms·

Dropbox disconnects Boxopus for unwanted features

106 points by Zirro 14y ago

warmwaffles 14y ago
Who saw this coming? Not I! /sarcasm
iuguy 14y ago
While it's easy to jump to conclusions, it might be a good idea to have a think and maybe ask some questions first. Dropbox provides a file sharing service, Boxopus uses this to provide torrent downloading services. Should Boxopus become popular, how will this impact Dropboxes cost base? Will people buy more dropbox space? Are Dropbox possibly obliged to deactivate Boxopus due to onerous copyright rules? Is there anything in their underlying contractual arrangements with their suppliers for example that could result in the termination of dropbox's service, or are they just trying to cover their backsides? I think this shows a good example of the increasingly common problem where startups tie themselves to a platform and suffer for it as well as benefit. They're looking for another storage provider, but who's to say this won't happen with a new provider too?
- Eduard 14y ago
  Dropbox "tied itself" to Amazon's S3 services. Imagine the situation that Amazon had stopped providing S3 API access to Dropbox once Dropbox took off.
  - pja 14y ago
    Dropbox is big enough to procure their own storage by now I'd have thought.
- legutierr 14y ago
  One question that you are not asking is whether this decision was affected in any way by the Megaupload case. If I were Dropbox, I would see arbitrary action by the US authorities as one of my greatest risks, and would do whatever it takes to stay in the good graces of the MPAA, given the apparent influence that they have over US law enforcement.
  - cabalamat 14y ago
    I expect that's what's happened. Copyright maximialism succeeds, yet again, in killing creativity.
- crisnoble 14y ago
  If you want to help them pick a new storage provider, they have a survey: http://blog.boxopus.com/index.php/2012/06/27/help-us-select-new-cloud-storage-service/ http://blog.boxopus.com/index.php/2012/06/27/help-us-select-...
wissler 14y ago
The original thread on this topic (that was evidently heavily flagged) is here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4161940 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4161940
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
huhtenberg 14y ago
Well, duh.
vampirechicken 14y ago
How is Boxopus better than just tellign your torrent client to download into your dropbox folder?
- jonknee 14y ago
  It would be handy if you wanted to download on a mobile device. Or if torrent traffic is penalized/banned.
- andreasvc 14y ago
  It doesn't use your bandwidth, but that of Boxopus.
  - fishbacon 14y ago
    It still uses bandwidth to download to your local Dropbox.
    - incongruity 14y ago
      Right, but it lets you/your personal connection avoid one leg: instead of torrent -> local dropbox -> cloud dropbox, you get only use your bandwidth for cloud dropbox -> local dropbox. Given that many residential ISPs that meter data service don't differentiate between uploaded vs. downloaded data, that's a potentially valuable way to externalize the bandwidth requirements for your torrent (of undoubtedly legal/paid or public domain content, I'm sure)...
    - Dylan16807 14y ago
      But not upload, which is usually far more restricted.
    - Danieru 14y ago
      Which is one third of what it would take to download, maintain seed ratio of 1, and then push a copy to dropbox.
- joeblau 14y ago
petitmiam 14y ago
What makes Dropbox special that they chose it as the only cloud storage solution that Boxopus works with?
- lmm 14y ago
  The fact that it's the only cloud storage solution most people have heard of?
inopinatus 14y ago
It was an absurd pairing of two separate and dissimilar block-structured sync protocols and I am not at all surprised. This should've been disallowed on pure bandwidth efficiency grounds. I'm sure the actual reason was "torrent user == pirate" and they just didn't want any juvenile connections, bad news in any language. Everyone who read the original story saw this coming.
dekz 14y ago
I feel like this is the wrong choice for Dropbox. Wouldn't they still be under DMCA safe harbour just as if I uploaded copyrighted material myself? Or is any type of downloader to your Dropbox against the terms of service as an 'Unwanted feature'? Sure they reserve the right to who uses their service, but if they are DMCA compliant are they just losing potential revenue?
- citricsquid 14y ago
  I would guess[1] it's more about not painting a giant target on their back. Yes Dropbox can be used for pirated material, but they don't promote it and there are no features of Dropbox that enable it, however if this service exists and gets substantial traction people will start to associate Dropbox with piracy and when that happens Dropbox risk being targeted by groups like the MPAA. Look at Megaupload, they were supposedly complying with the law. [1] Pure speculation
  - tptacek 14y ago
    I know you know this, but for the benefit of the thread: Megaupload is commonly understood to have been "complying with the law" based on a misapprehension of what the law actually is. The misapprehension is that "compliance" with US copyright law means "honoring takedown notices". The reality of US copyright law is that there are two sides to compliance: first, takedown notices need to be honored, and second, the service can't operate with foreknowledge of infringing use. You can execute takedown notices within milliseconds of their arrival, but if an opposing lawyer or prosecutor can demonstrate that you repeatedly (a) came into knowledge that your service was used for piracy and (b) took no action, you effectively forfeit the service provider "safe harbor". It was discovered by prosecutors that Megaupload not only knew about infringing content on their own site (trading links among staff for particular films, for instance), but also ran a promotional/affiliate program that rewarded uploaders for pushing popular copyrighted material to the site.
jarcoal 14y ago
Busy week for API drama. I'm going to have to side with Dropbox on this one. This tool was quite obviously going to be harnessed for piracy.
- jQueryIsAwesome 14y ago
  And code editors are quite obviously going to be used to create spyware, virus and Trojans. What is exactly your point?
  - billpatrianakos 14y ago
    The difference is that no one will stop you from creating and distributing your own code editor even if you advertise that it's meant for malicious or illegal development. But don't expect the same privilege when you base your app off of someone else's API which you get to use for free by the way. Everyone knows when you use an API you're a house guest, paying no rent and you can be asked to leave at any time.
- Smudge 14y ago
  The internet is harnessed for piracy. I guess we'd better turn it off then.
  - billpatrianakos 14y ago
    You can't sue the Internet though. This line of argument begins with entitlement. Dropbox is a company with an ass to protect. Anyone using any service's API is never entitled to any guarantees regardless of whether they comply with their TOS or not. The purpose of an API is to simultaneously add value for users and widen use of the produc (both of those fall technically under the banner of "to help the company providing the API make boat loads of money). The other part of people's defense of Boxupus is this whole idea that just because it could be used to violate copyright doesn't mean it will. Anyone who honestly, deep down, truly believes this and isn't just towing the Pirate Party Line needs to wake up. The majority of people downloading from torrents are downloading copyrighted material which is not legal, like it or not, the legalities of copyright law are irrelevant here. While I'm sure you can pop in and say "but I was using it for legit use case x, y, and z", most people were using it for downloading music and movies. Where's my proof? Fuck my proof. Where's your proof (I'm using the royal "your" here, not aimed at the op here) that it was being used so innocently? It really makes me upset that I just know someone will try to call me out for not having evidence on that one point despite the fact that we all know what was up just like we all knew what was up with MegaUpload. Demanding my evidence on that one point is the last defense of a person who's just grasping at straws, defending some pro-piracy ideology. But piracy isnt even the issue nor is it relevant! Dropbox is a company here to make money. Just mentioning torrents puts people in a frenzy. So they're protecting themselves from liability by making sure their product is not associated in any way with torrents. It doesn't matter whether they have a legit purpose or not. It's a case of perception trumping all else and you have to remember that even beyond legal issues, Dropbox has a brand to protect. The perception of Dropbox is that of an exceptionally wholesome file storage/sharing service. Why would they even risk being seen as even the teensiest bit shady?
KaoruAoiShiho 14y ago
The solution is simple. Build a 2 tier app? One innocuous app (SendToDropbox) that moves files into dropbox. Second app (TorrentIntoSendToDropbox) that saves torrents into the first app.
- eli 14y ago
  The legal system is surprisingly humorless when it comes to "hacks" like that.
  - aptwebapps 14y ago
    The tax system, on the other hand ...
crazygringo 14y ago
It bothers me that companies are allowed to make discriminatory decisions like this, when providing public-facing services. If your TOS states that Dropbox can't be used for files above a particular size, or can only be used by individuals and not corporations, or something like that, then fine. But companies that discriminate based on the purpose of usage -- this seems fundamentally wrong. MasterCard blocking WikiLeaks payments, Dropbox blocking torrents, PayPal banning a VPN provider... Private companies have no business deciding what is "acceptable" in this manner. If it's illegal for them to provide services, then obviously they can't, but if it isn't, then they should continue to provide services. Honestly, is this any different from a company ninety years ago denying service to non-whites because it "could be perceived as encouraging the races to intermarry?" There's a reason we have anti-discrimination laws for races, gender, orientation and religion. Why don't we have them for "purpose of use of services"?
- glesica 14y ago
  Because it's a slippery slope from there to eliminating property rights entirely. If you require companies to declare all instances under which they will terminate service they'll just amend their ToS or add insanely broad clauses that let them disconnect anyone at any time. This is the fundamental problem with SaaS and web APIs more generally (a SaaS application is just a web API for humans in some sense): you don't control it. It isn't installed on your hard drive. If the vendor says "you can't use this any more" you can't give them the middle finger and keep using your copy while you find a good lawyer. You're done. That's it. Does that mean I think everyone should stop using SaaS and APIs? Absolutely not. I would cry if I had to give up Google Docs, Gmail, etc. But I'm not under any illusions about who is in charge, and I make decisions accordingly.
- pflats 14y ago
  First, let's just ignore the straw man of: >Honestly, is this any different from a company ninety years ago denying service to non-whites because it "could be perceived as encouraging the races to intermarry?" I think we can both agree that it's a hyperbolic statement. Moving beyond that, as a company, I should have every right to decide who can and cannot use my service. Just because I provide a public-facing API doesn't mean I have to allow you do to what you want with it. You're building off of my brand and my infrastructure. If I don't want Initech Inc. to be associated with file sharing, fire arms, or even the Irish, that's entirely within my rights. I'd be far more aghast if companies were forced to take any comers. On this specific issue, scan the headlines: "Pirate’s dream come true: Boxopus pushes torrents to your Dropbox account" "Boxopus Is A Pirate Friend, Drops Torrents Directly Into Dropbox‎" "New App Makes Pirating Movies A One-Click Process" The articles also point out that Boxopus was quickly integrated with a number of torrent sites that host bootleg downloads. The absolute last thing Dropbox wants to be associated with is piracy. The company is in much more danger of going out of business due to piracy issues than to any competitor.
jQueryIsAwesome 14y ago
I think this is a sign of weakness from Dropbox; for example, big strong players like Google don't just erase all the links to ThePirateBay.se just because some big record label says so; they wait until they are actually forced to do so with a legal petition (e.g. DMCA)
st3fan 14y ago
The lesson here is to never let your core business depend on another company's core business. You just don't want that kind of dependency.
voodoochilo 14y ago
quod erat expectandum.
wavephorm 14y ago
This kind of reinforces my belief that Dropbox is merely a segway toward a more private, decentralized (self-hosted), cloud-based filesystem. How is Dropbox ever going to stay relevant in the future if they go around telling people what they can and can't store in their directories?
- edanm 14y ago
  Simple - no one cares (for values of "no one" equal to 99% of the population).
jsilence 14y ago
This shows the difference between an API and a protocol. You are at the sole discretion of the company whose API you are using. Different cloud storage provider, different API. I wish they all started using the remoteStorage protocol. http://www.w3.org/community/unhosted/wiki/RemoteStorage http://www.w3.org/community/unhosted/wiki/RemoteStorage
n9com 14y ago
Surprise, Surprise... did you really not see this coming? Don't rely on 3rd party APIs!
chris_wot 14y ago
Perhaps Dropbox should block itself, given that it can also encourage copyright violations. Time to setup OwnCloud!
gubatron 14y ago
I don't understand the need for this company in the first place, (Anonymity when pirating?) If you wanted to store BitTorrent downloads in Dropbox, all you gotta do is tell your torrent client to use your local dropbox folder as a save location...
shasty 14y ago
Dont build anything of value on someone elses API. THey will kill you.
tomc1985 14y ago
We're making mountains out of molehills. Don't build your shit on a platform you could reasonably expect to be taken away from you. Company management often sees piracy (and sex) as a plague that can erode customer and investor support in their business. * * * Once upon a time there were three little pigs. One pig built a house of straw while the second pig built his house with sticks. They built their houses very quickly and then sang and danced all day because they were lazy. The third little pig worked hard all day and built his house with bricks. A big bad wolf saw the two little pigs while they danced and played and thought, “What juicy tender meals they will make!” He chased the two pigs and they ran and hid in their houses. The big bad wolf went to the first house and huffed and puffed and blew the house down in minutes. The frightened little pig ran to the second pig’s house that was made of sticks. The big bad wolf now came to this house and huffed and puffed and blew the house down in hardly any time. Now, the two little pigs were terrified and ran to the third pig’s house that was made of bricks. The big bad wolf tried to huff and puff and blow the house down, but he could not. He kept trying for hours but the house was very strong and the little pigs were safe inside. He tried to enter through the chimney but the third little pig boiled a big pot of water and kept it below the chimney. The wolf fell into it and died. The two little pigs now felt sorry for having been so lazy. They too built their houses with bricks and lived happily ever after.
andyjohnson0 14y ago
As so many people have pointed out over the last few years, building your product on top of someone else's product is a bad idea unless you have a legally-binding agreement in-place. And having an api key isn't a substitute for such an agreement. If this principle had a name (ie "<someone's> law") then maybe people would pay more attention. (And OT: I read "boxopus" as "box o' pus", which makes me think perhaps its a poor name)
- executive 14y ago
  im not sure why anyone would want to build an app on a platform that lets you log in to any users account without a password... maybe something low risk like hosting torrent downloads
J3L2404 14y ago
It's pretty appalling that people believe Dropbox has an obligation to bear all the burden so some "startup" can make a quick buck off of copyrighted material. Where are the thought leaders on this? Sitting around with eyepatches over their mouths?
MalphasWats 14y ago
I'm genuinely curious, as I've never actually used it[1], but if someone waved a magic wand, and ALL illegal music, movies and books vanished from bittorrent networks, what would be left? [1]blizzard uses it for WoW updates, but I don't think that really counts.

106 points by Zirro 14y ago

Who saw this coming? Not I! /sarcasm

iuguy 14y ago

While it's easy to jump to conclusions, it might be a good idea to have a think and maybe ask some questions first. Dropbox provides a file sharing service, Boxopus uses this to provide torrent downloading services. Should Boxopus become popular, how will this impact Dropboxes cost base? Will people buy more dropbox space? Are Dropbox possibly obliged to deactivate Boxopus due to onerous copyright rules? Is there anything in their underlying contractual arrangements with their suppliers for example that could result in the termination of dropbox's service, or are they just trying to cover their backsides? I think this shows a good example of the increasingly common problem where startups tie themselves to a platform and suffer for it as well as benefit. They're looking for another storage provider, but who's to say this won't happen with a new provider too?

Eduard 14y ago
Dropbox "tied itself" to Amazon's S3 services. Imagine the situation that Amazon had stopped providing S3 API access to Dropbox once Dropbox took off.
- pja 14y ago
  Dropbox is big enough to procure their own storage by now I'd have thought.
legutierr 14y ago
One question that you are not asking is whether this decision was affected in any way by the Megaupload case. If I were Dropbox, I would see arbitrary action by the US authorities as one of my greatest risks, and would do whatever it takes to stay in the good graces of the MPAA, given the apparent influence that they have over US law enforcement.
- cabalamat 14y ago
  I expect that's what's happened. Copyright maximialism succeeds, yet again, in killing creativity.
crisnoble 14y ago
If you want to help them pick a new storage provider, they have a survey: http://blog.boxopus.com/index.php/2012/06/27/help-us-select-new-cloud-storage-service/ http://blog.boxopus.com/index.php/2012/06/27/help-us-select-...

wissler 14y ago

The original thread on this topic (that was evidently heavily flagged) is here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4161940 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4161940

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

huhtenberg 14y ago

Well, duh.

vampirechicken 14y ago

How is Boxopus better than just tellign your torrent client to download into your dropbox folder?

jonknee 14y ago
It would be handy if you wanted to download on a mobile device. Or if torrent traffic is penalized/banned.
andreasvc 14y ago
It doesn't use your bandwidth, but that of Boxopus.
- fishbacon 14y ago
  It still uses bandwidth to download to your local Dropbox.
  - incongruity 14y ago
    Right, but it lets you/your personal connection avoid one leg: instead of torrent -> local dropbox -> cloud dropbox, you get only use your bandwidth for cloud dropbox -> local dropbox. Given that many residential ISPs that meter data service don't differentiate between uploaded vs. downloaded data, that's a potentially valuable way to externalize the bandwidth requirements for your torrent (of undoubtedly legal/paid or public domain content, I'm sure)...
  - Dylan16807 14y ago
    But not upload, which is usually far more restricted.
  - Danieru 14y ago
    Which is one third of what it would take to download, maintain seed ratio of 1, and then push a copy to dropbox.
joeblau 14y ago

petitmiam 14y ago

What makes Dropbox special that they chose it as the only cloud storage solution that Boxopus works with?

lmm 14y ago
The fact that it's the only cloud storage solution most people have heard of?

inopinatus 14y ago

It was an absurd pairing of two separate and dissimilar block-structured sync protocols and I am not at all surprised. This should've been disallowed on pure bandwidth efficiency grounds. I'm sure the actual reason was "torrent user == pirate" and they just didn't want any juvenile connections, bad news in any language. Everyone who read the original story saw this coming.

dekz 14y ago

I feel like this is the wrong choice for Dropbox. Wouldn't they still be under DMCA safe harbour just as if I uploaded copyrighted material myself? Or is any type of downloader to your Dropbox against the terms of service as an 'Unwanted feature'? Sure they reserve the right to who uses their service, but if they are DMCA compliant are they just losing potential revenue?

citricsquid 14y ago
I would guess[1] it's more about not painting a giant target on their back. Yes Dropbox can be used for pirated material, but they don't promote it and there are no features of Dropbox that enable it, however if this service exists and gets substantial traction people will start to associate Dropbox with piracy and when that happens Dropbox risk being targeted by groups like the MPAA. Look at Megaupload, they were supposedly complying with the law. [1] Pure speculation
- tptacek 14y ago
  I know you know this, but for the benefit of the thread: Megaupload is commonly understood to have been "complying with the law" based on a misapprehension of what the law actually is. The misapprehension is that "compliance" with US copyright law means "honoring takedown notices". The reality of US copyright law is that there are two sides to compliance: first, takedown notices need to be honored, and second, the service can't operate with foreknowledge of infringing use. You can execute takedown notices within milliseconds of their arrival, but if an opposing lawyer or prosecutor can demonstrate that you repeatedly (a) came into knowledge that your service was used for piracy and (b) took no action, you effectively forfeit the service provider "safe harbor". It was discovered by prosecutors that Megaupload not only knew about infringing content on their own site (trading links among staff for particular films, for instance), but also ran a promotional/affiliate program that rewarded uploaders for pushing popular copyrighted material to the site.

jarcoal 14y ago

Busy week for API drama. I'm going to have to side with Dropbox on this one. This tool was quite obviously going to be harnessed for piracy.

jQueryIsAwesome 14y ago
And code editors are quite obviously going to be used to create spyware, virus and Trojans. What is exactly your point?
- billpatrianakos 14y ago
  The difference is that no one will stop you from creating and distributing your own code editor even if you advertise that it's meant for malicious or illegal development. But don't expect the same privilege when you base your app off of someone else's API which you get to use for free by the way. Everyone knows when you use an API you're a house guest, paying no rent and you can be asked to leave at any time.
Smudge 14y ago
The internet is harnessed for piracy. I guess we'd better turn it off then.
- billpatrianakos 14y ago
  You can't sue the Internet though. This line of argument begins with entitlement. Dropbox is a company with an ass to protect. Anyone using any service's API is never entitled to any guarantees regardless of whether they comply with their TOS or not. The purpose of an API is to simultaneously add value for users and widen use of the produc (both of those fall technically under the banner of "to help the company providing the API make boat loads of money). The other part of people's defense of Boxupus is this whole idea that just because it could be used to violate copyright doesn't mean it will. Anyone who honestly, deep down, truly believes this and isn't just towing the Pirate Party Line needs to wake up. The majority of people downloading from torrents are downloading copyrighted material which is not legal, like it or not, the legalities of copyright law are irrelevant here. While I'm sure you can pop in and say "but I was using it for legit use case x, y, and z", most people were using it for downloading music and movies. Where's my proof? Fuck my proof. Where's your proof (I'm using the royal "your" here, not aimed at the op here) that it was being used so innocently? It really makes me upset that I just know someone will try to call me out for not having evidence on that one point despite the fact that we all know what was up just like we all knew what was up with MegaUpload. Demanding my evidence on that one point is the last defense of a person who's just grasping at straws, defending some pro-piracy ideology. But piracy isnt even the issue nor is it relevant! Dropbox is a company here to make money. Just mentioning torrents puts people in a frenzy. So they're protecting themselves from liability by making sure their product is not associated in any way with torrents. It doesn't matter whether they have a legit purpose or not. It's a case of perception trumping all else and you have to remember that even beyond legal issues, Dropbox has a brand to protect. The perception of Dropbox is that of an exceptionally wholesome file storage/sharing service. Why would they even risk being seen as even the teensiest bit shady?

KaoruAoiShiho 14y ago

The solution is simple. Build a 2 tier app? One innocuous app (SendToDropbox) that moves files into dropbox. Second app (TorrentIntoSendToDropbox) that saves torrents into the first app.

eli 14y ago
The legal system is surprisingly humorless when it comes to "hacks" like that.
- aptwebapps 14y ago
  The tax system, on the other hand ...

crazygringo 14y ago

It bothers me that companies are allowed to make discriminatory decisions like this, when providing public-facing services. If your TOS states that Dropbox can't be used for files above a particular size, or can only be used by individuals and not corporations, or something like that, then fine. But companies that discriminate based on the purpose of usage -- this seems fundamentally wrong. MasterCard blocking WikiLeaks payments, Dropbox blocking torrents, PayPal banning a VPN provider... Private companies have no business deciding what is "acceptable" in this manner. If it's illegal for them to provide services, then obviously they can't, but if it isn't, then they should continue to provide services. Honestly, is this any different from a company ninety years ago denying service to non-whites because it "could be perceived as encouraging the races to intermarry?" There's a reason we have anti-discrimination laws for races, gender, orientation and religion. Why don't we have them for "purpose of use of services"?

glesica 14y ago
Because it's a slippery slope from there to eliminating property rights entirely. If you require companies to declare all instances under which they will terminate service they'll just amend their ToS or add insanely broad clauses that let them disconnect anyone at any time. This is the fundamental problem with SaaS and web APIs more generally (a SaaS application is just a web API for humans in some sense): you don't control it. It isn't installed on your hard drive. If the vendor says "you can't use this any more" you can't give them the middle finger and keep using your copy while you find a good lawyer. You're done. That's it. Does that mean I think everyone should stop using SaaS and APIs? Absolutely not. I would cry if I had to give up Google Docs, Gmail, etc. But I'm not under any illusions about who is in charge, and I make decisions accordingly.
pflats 14y ago
First, let's just ignore the straw man of: >Honestly, is this any different from a company ninety years ago denying service to non-whites because it "could be perceived as encouraging the races to intermarry?" I think we can both agree that it's a hyperbolic statement. Moving beyond that, as a company, I should have every right to decide who can and cannot use my service. Just because I provide a public-facing API doesn't mean I have to allow you do to what you want with it. You're building off of my brand and my infrastructure. If I don't want Initech Inc. to be associated with file sharing, fire arms, or even the Irish, that's entirely within my rights. I'd be far more aghast if companies were forced to take any comers. On this specific issue, scan the headlines: "Pirate’s dream come true: Boxopus pushes torrents to your Dropbox account" "Boxopus Is A Pirate Friend, Drops Torrents Directly Into Dropbox‎" "New App Makes Pirating Movies A One-Click Process" The articles also point out that Boxopus was quickly integrated with a number of torrent sites that host bootleg downloads. The absolute last thing Dropbox wants to be associated with is piracy. The company is in much more danger of going out of business due to piracy issues than to any competitor.

jQueryIsAwesome 14y ago

I think this is a sign of weakness from Dropbox; for example, big strong players like Google don't just erase all the links to ThePirateBay.se just because some big record label says so; they wait until they are actually forced to do so with a legal petition (e.g. DMCA)

st3fan 14y ago

The lesson here is to never let your core business depend on another company's core business. You just don't want that kind of dependency.

voodoochilo 14y ago

quod erat expectandum.

wavephorm 14y ago

This kind of reinforces my belief that Dropbox is merely a segway toward a more private, decentralized (self-hosted), cloud-based filesystem. How is Dropbox ever going to stay relevant in the future if they go around telling people what they can and can't store in their directories?

edanm 14y ago
Simple - no one cares (for values of "no one" equal to 99% of the population).

jsilence 14y ago

This shows the difference between an API and a protocol. You are at the sole discretion of the company whose API you are using. Different cloud storage provider, different API. I wish they all started using the remoteStorage protocol. http://www.w3.org/community/unhosted/wiki/RemoteStorage http://www.w3.org/community/unhosted/wiki/RemoteStorage

n9com 14y ago

Surprise, Surprise... did you really not see this coming? Don't rely on 3rd party APIs!

chris_wot 14y ago

Perhaps Dropbox should block itself, given that it can also encourage copyright violations. Time to setup OwnCloud!

gubatron 14y ago

I don't understand the need for this company in the first place, (Anonymity when pirating?) If you wanted to store BitTorrent downloads in Dropbox, all you gotta do is tell your torrent client to use your local dropbox folder as a save location...

shasty 14y ago

Dont build anything of value on someone elses API. THey will kill you.

tomc1985 14y ago

We're making mountains out of molehills. Don't build your shit on a platform you could reasonably expect to be taken away from you. Company management often sees piracy (and sex) as a plague that can erode customer and investor support in their business. * * * Once upon a time there were three little pigs. One pig built a house of straw while the second pig built his house with sticks. They built their houses very quickly and then sang and danced all day because they were lazy. The third little pig worked hard all day and built his house with bricks. A big bad wolf saw the two little pigs while they danced and played and thought, “What juicy tender meals they will make!” He chased the two pigs and they ran and hid in their houses. The big bad wolf went to the first house and huffed and puffed and blew the house down in minutes. The frightened little pig ran to the second pig’s house that was made of sticks. The big bad wolf now came to this house and huffed and puffed and blew the house down in hardly any time. Now, the two little pigs were terrified and ran to the third pig’s house that was made of bricks. The big bad wolf tried to huff and puff and blow the house down, but he could not. He kept trying for hours but the house was very strong and the little pigs were safe inside. He tried to enter through the chimney but the third little pig boiled a big pot of water and kept it below the chimney. The wolf fell into it and died. The two little pigs now felt sorry for having been so lazy. They too built their houses with bricks and lived happily ever after.

andyjohnson0 14y ago

As so many people have pointed out over the last few years, building your product on top of someone else's product is a bad idea unless you have a legally-binding agreement in-place. And having an api key isn't a substitute for such an agreement. If this principle had a name (ie "<someone's> law") then maybe people would pay more attention. (And OT: I read "boxopus" as "box o' pus", which makes me think perhaps its a poor name)

executive 14y ago
im not sure why anyone would want to build an app on a platform that lets you log in to any users account without a password... maybe something low risk like hosting torrent downloads

J3L2404 14y ago

It's pretty appalling that people believe Dropbox has an obligation to bear all the burden so some "startup" can make a quick buck off of copyrighted material. Where are the thought leaders on this? Sitting around with eyepatches over their mouths?

MalphasWats 14y ago

I'm genuinely curious, as I've never actually used it[1], but if someone waved a magic wand, and ALL illegal music, movies and books vanished from bittorrent networks, what would be left? [1]blizzard uses it for WoW updates, but I don't think that really counts.