Pebble, Rebble, and a path forward

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Overview of the Dispute

  • Thread responds to two posts: Rebble accusing Core of “stealing our work” and Core’s rebuttal laying out its side.
  • Most commenters see a classic mutual-trust breakdown: both sides think the other can jeopardize the ecosystem and feel existentially threatened.

Ownership and Access to App Store Data

  • Central conflict: the Pebble/Rebble app store archive.
  • Rebble:
    • Scraped and rebuilt the original Pebble app store, patched hundreds of apps, added new ones, and runs paid services (weather, voice-to-text).
    • Fears Core will ingest this data, build its own closed store, lock Rebble out, and leave them with “less than they started with” if Core fails.
  • Core:
    • Argues the app data came from thousands of independent developers and “should not be controlled by one organization.”
    • Offers to pay Rebble per user and keep using Rebble-hosted services but wants freedom to build competing features and avoid dependency on a third party.

Open Source, Licensing, and Nonprofit Status

  • PebbleOS is now Apache-2.0; many see this as strong protection against future lock-in.
  • Several argue that building a business on open source + scraped data inherently risks being superseded.
  • Debate over Rebble’s “nonprofit” status (state-level, not 501(c)(3)); some find their nonprofit branding potentially misleading, others say it’s irrelevant if they’re not soliciting tax-deductible donations.

Scraping Allegations and Conduct

  • Rebble says Core violated a no-scraping agreement; Core says it only used a tool to visually review watchfaces, not archive binaries.
  • Long subthread on what “scraping” means and whether intent or storage matters.
  • Many criticize Rebble for objecting to scraping when their own archive began as scraping the original Pebble store.
  • Publishing private chat screenshots without consent is widely viewed as a bad look for Core.

Trust, Sustainability, and User Reactions

  • Some default trust to the original hardware founder; others to the long-running community maintainers.
  • Concerns that:
    • Core could repeat Pebble’s original failure or “enshittify” later.
    • Rebble is acting like a gatekeeper/rent-seeker rather than a neutral steward.
  • Several users cancel preorders; others say they’re still excited and grateful for new hardware.

Proposed Paths Forward

  • Legal guarantees that any Core app store remains open and accessible to third parties.
  • Dual stores: Core for new/actively maintained apps, Rebble as an archival “classic” catalog.
  • Stronger copyleft licensing and/or moving governance to a neutral OSS foundation.
  • General sentiment: both sides are hurting the ecosystem; users want guarantees that devices, apps, and data remain usable if either party disappears.