Hacker News Reader

I'd love to hear more about this from someone with legal expertise.

It makes no sense for them to claim that every extension published on the Chrome store needs to comply with their acceptable use policy...

If that were true, then wouldn't 1Password and any other extension that uses a content script also be considered unacceptable?

View on HN

Great question. What matters is the outcome, not the mechanism. It is the modification of the functionality of Slack’s product which is at issue. Most extensions don’t do that in any substantial manner.

Furthermore, in a civil suit what needs to be demonstrated are actual damages to their business. (It’s not enough to just show that the ToS were violated). There’s no possibility of that for most browser extensions.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com