Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

That's well-written PR Todd, but the bottom line is this: your false positives are doing potentially severe damage to third parties. These are people who aren't even using your service.

When these things happen you need a way to fix them quickly, or you will find yourselves in legal hot water sooner or later.

Also, I might suggest to you that you have neither the power nor the authority to be the link police on the internet. What you're doing is engaging in an arms race that A) is impossible to win, and B) has numerous innocent bystanders.

I've never really been one to decry the dangers of link shorteners, but this is a great example of how a link shortener—even with a team of stand-up ethical guys behind it—can be bad for the internet.

We've been thinking about signing up for bit.ly pro, and I have to say this throws a wet blanket over the whole thing.



We've been thinking about signing up for bit.ly pro, and I have to say this throws a wet blanket over the whole thing.

whitelabel shouldn't be nearly as bad - as long as you control the domain name you can always take your ball and go home.


Yes, definitely whitelabel was already a requirement for us.

My comment was more about the moral aspect though.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: