Suffered suspicions rise on platform 'Otonomo' to collect and sell car data
Otonomo is a start-up that develops a platform business to buy and sell connected car data, and in April 2019, it has been the fastest growing company to earn $ 10 million (approximately 1,119 million yen) from SK Group in Korea I'm showing you. For such Otonomo, the same company's Smartcar claims that 'the API document has been stolen', and is showing a willingness to refuse any legal action.
How Otonomo, with nearly $ 55 million in funding, is illegal cloning our product
Smartcar accuses $ 50M-funded rival Otonomo of API plagiarism | TechCrunch
It is CEO of Smartcar CEO Sahus Katta, who is developing platforms for connected cars as well as Otonomo, claiming that Otonomo stole API documents. An API document is a specification document that defines the procedures required to use program functions. In the official blog , Mr. Kutter accused that 'the API document published on the Smartcar site and the API document of Otonomo were very similar', and the official Twitter account of Smartcar also 'stopped the infringement against Otonomo I will recommend you. '
Mr. Catter points out the similarities by taking screenshots of the API document released by Smartcar in August 2018 and the API document released by Otonomo in April 2019. For example, a random identifier '4a1b01e5-0497-417c-a30e-6df6ba33ba46' or ...
The description of the parameter is almost the same as the phrase, as if it were copied and pasted.
Although it seems natural that the specifications are similar to a certain extent in terms of API documents that handle data of the same connected car, it is not usually the case that randomly generated strings are the same. Mr. Katta commented to an IT news media TechCrunch interviewer that 'the probability that the same string will be generated by chance is one tenth of 10'. On the other hand, Otonomo side replied to TechCrunch, 'The materials published by Smartcar can be accessed by anyone on the Internet, so they are all considered as content in the public domain'. While acknowledging that the Smartcar API document has been diverted, there is a view that there is no problem, but the
Mr. Katta pointed out that the Smartcar page had attribution , and denied Otonomo's view that it was in the public domain was completely wrong. Because Smartcar has already taken legal action, Mr. Kutter's blog post is overwhelmed by the words 'Stay tuned.'