Core Devices keeps stealing our work

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Allegations and context

  • Rebble claims Core Devices:
    • Forked its open-source libraries, added code under a more restrictive dual license, and wrapped them in a closed-source companion app.
    • Scraped Rebble’s app-store backend after negotiations over data access stalled, despite being told commercial scraping was not authorized.
  • Many readers see this as ethically “not cool,” especially given the highly technical, OSS-oriented Pebble userbase.

Licensing and “stealing” debate

  • Thread digs into licenses (Apache, GPLv3, AGPLv3, dual licensing, CLAs):
    • Some argue Core’s behavior is legally fine: they kept original GPL-compatible licensing for existing code, added AGPL/commercial terms only to their contributions, and this is standard dual-licensing practice.
    • Others question:
      • Whether they properly preserved original copyright and license notices.
      • Whether you can re-present a fork as “ours, dual-licensed” without clearly delineating inherited code.
    • A recurring theme: permissive licenses (Apache/BSD/MIT) enable exactly this; if you don’t want this outcome, you should use strong copyleft (GPL/AGPL).

App store data and scraping

  • Rebble’s store is described as:
    • Initially scraped from Pebble’s dying service to prevent data loss.
    • Then extended with a new dev portal, new and updated apps, curation, and takedown handling.
  • Critics highlight the irony that Rebble, having scraped Pebble, now objects to being scraped.
  • Defenders counter that “rescue scraping” from a defunct owner is different from scraping an active partner mid-negotiation.
  • There is skepticism over who can legitimately “license” a database composed largely of third-party apps.

Community reaction and trust

  • Many pre-order customers say they will cancel unless:
    • There’s a clear, written commitment to third-party app stores and a future role for Rebble (or at least for alternative stores generally).
  • Others argue:
    • Rebble’s work alone isn’t enough; without a viable hardware business the ecosystem dies.
    • Core has materially contributed (new firmware, working mobile apps) and is paying, or has agreed to pay, Rebble for store access.
  • Trust in the original Pebble leadership is sharply divided; some see a pattern from the Fitbit sale, others frame that as a simple business failure.

Open ecosystem vs business reality & paths forward

  • Strong current in favor of:
    • Everything important being FOSS: firmware, libraries, tooling, plus easy data export and pluggable app stores.
    • Devices that can be pointed at Rebble, Core, or self-hosted services.
  • Some advise “vote with your wallet”; others urge patience and reading Core’s response blog, seeing some positive movement but lingering “orange flags.”