4 ms·
Missing the context... What code was there before? Was it a reverse engineering of the API whatsapp binaries use? Is there any legal basis for demanding someone
by andreyf 11y ago
Missing the context... What code was there before? Was it a reverse engineering of the API whatsapp binaries use? Is there any legal basis for demanding someone remove that?
- dsl 11y agoYes, WhatsAPI was a reverse engineer and implementation of the WhatsApp protocol. It was mostly used by websites offering a web based chat interface for WhatsApp and by spammers.
- aryamaan 11y agoPardon my ignorance, but is it using the same api which inherently whatsApp client uses? Or is it just a open sourced version of whatsApp?
- soapdog 11y agoActually these libraries are used by third-party clients on platforms that Whatsapp doesnt officially support such as webOS, Firefox OS and others. Its not about spamming, its about being able to offer a decent client on platforms that are not covered by official clients.
- duskwuff 11y agoDoes the library enable the service to be used on more platforms? Yes. Does the library enable spammers to abuse the service? Also yes. It's not an either/or situation.
- soapdog 11y agoA library is just a tool, like a hammer, you can build a shelf with it or hit your neighbor. anyway, you don`t solve that problem by banning hammers....
- hakanito 11y agoThe code is still there, just browse code in the latest pull request. https://github.com/venomous0x/WhatsAPI/tree/fd07b49a459cda2568c29433e58ee849000096b0 https://github.com/venomous0x/WhatsAPI/tree/fd07b49a459cda25...
- veeti 11y agoCan you clone this somehow? You can get a ZIP from the sidebar, but having the history would be nice.
- cesarb 11y agoIt's not well-known, but if you use "git clone --mirror" instead of just "git clone", you get a copy of all the pull requests as git commits, with the full history leading to each of them.
- pluma 11y agoI don't think there's a legal basis for preventing someone from reverse engineering an API in general. The "non-circumvention" clause in the DMCA is often used to go after people reverse engineering DRM, but I fail to see how it would be applicable in this case.