Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

In my opinion what Meerkat did wrong was not making relationship with Twitter. The reason why they got blocked are simple:

- v1 of Meerkat was posting on user's behalf without permission, auto-follow @Meerkat on sign-up, sending Twitter notifications without permission.

- user's social graph cannot be ported to the 3rd party apps

- recreating commenting network using Twitter's API

This is why I am not surprised Twitter blocked them. They say: "you don't shit, where you eat".




If Twitter already bought a competitor, why would they make a relationship with Meerkat?


Twitter bought Periscope after Meerkat got press, although it may not have been a cause-and-effect relationship. (M&As take time.)

EDIT: See joeblau's comment below.


I think Twitter bought Periscope (In January Sometime) before Meerkat launched (Early March), but Twitter didn't disclose the acquisition until after Meerkat launched (Mid March).

http://venturebeat.com/2015/03/09/twitter-reportedly-buys-st...


Sounds a lot like this blog post: www.twizoo.com/meerkat Also picked up by Business Insider: http://uk.businessinsider.com/the-meerkat-saga-shows-the-dan...

But yes, agreed. Don't shit where you eat.


Meerkat is doing just alright the $21M in their bank (despite being blocked).


I'm happy for them. Don't get me wrong, I love meerkat, it's a great app. Periscope looks like a one night hack for me. My point is that their entire app relies entirely on Twitter.


To me, Meerkat is the one that looks like a one night hack...




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

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

Search: