Haier hits Home Assistant plugin dev with takedown notice
A smart-appliance maker has ordered a Home Assistant plugin developer to remove two integrations that connect its devices to the open‑source home automation platform, arguing the tools violate its terms of service and cause “economic harm” by using its cloud APIs. Commenters question the legal basis and proportionality of targeting a hobbyist, warning that such moves chill reverse-engineering and “adversarial interoperability” and will drive power users to boycott cloud‑dependent products altogether. The exchange broadens into a critique of IoT design that relies on fragile, vendor-controlled cloud services instead of resilient local interfaces, and of manufacturers who ignore or antagonize the volunteer communities that extend their products’ capabilities.
Takedown and Affected Projects
- Discussion centers on Haier sending a cease‑and‑desist over two Home Assistant integrations hosted on GitHub that talk to Haier’s cloud APIs.
- People expect the repos may disappear and suggest cloning or mirroring them before that happens.
DMCA vs Terms of Service
- Several note this doesn’t appear to be a DMCA/copyright claim but a ToS / “unauthorized use of services” claim and “economic harm” allegation.
- Some see the letter as legally weak but effective intimidation because individuals can’t afford to fight.
- Others argue reverse‑engineering and API use should be lawful, comparing to past interoperability court cases, though applicability here is unclear.
Forking, Mirroring, and Obfuscation
- Suggestions: clone locally, push to a new repo not marked as a fork, rebase/squash history, or rewrite history so GitHub’s fork detection is harder.
- Some recommend mirroring to non‑GitHub hosts.
- It’s noted GitHub will auto‑remove direct forks under DMCA, but here no platform takedown has yet been filed.
Cloud APIs, Load, and Polling
- An industry-side commenter claims Home Assistant cloud integrations can generate disproportionate traffic relative to user count, particularly when polling, and that this can be expensive.
- Others counter that companies should either build better APIs, rate-limit, or contribute fixes to community integrations instead of threatening takedowns.
Local vs Cloud Control and Security
- Strong sentiment: avoid devices that depend on vendor clouds; favor local APIs, Zigbee/Z-Wave, or ESPHome-style solutions.
- Debate over security: some argue local HTTP APIs have historically been a major IoT vulnerability; others say secure local access is feasible and often safer than cloud dependence.
- Cybersecurity teams are portrayed as often blocking local interfaces even when internal advocates push for them.
Adversarial Interoperability and Regulation
- Multiple commenters frame this as a digital-rights issue: users should be able to make devices they own interoperate with other systems.
- Tied to “right to repair” and calls for stronger advocacy (EFF, EU lawyers, etc.).
- Upcoming and existing EU cybersecurity rules are mentioned as potentially entrenching vendor control (e.g., secure boot, certification).
Consumer Response and Vendor Perception
- Many state they will now avoid Haier (and related brands like GE Appliances in this context) or add them to “blacklists”.
- Some share negative experiences with Haier product quality and support, reinforcing boycott sentiment; others report decent “dumb” appliances but remain wary of “smart” ones.