Nitter: Update Oct 10th seeking funding and legal help

andsoitis

> seeking funding What’s the purpose of Nitter? Elevator pitch if you will? And where can one read a bio of the creator(s)?

1ba9115454

Nitter is/was a free, open-source alternative front-end for X (formerly Twitter) that lets users view public posts without an account, ads, or tracking scripts.

skeledrew

Well, it was good while it lasted.

bhouston

I don’t think nitter can run legally. It would be like having a proxy for nytimes or cnn. I think its (or systems like it) only possible future is to acknowledge it doesn’t have a legal future.

jaggs

Surely Nitter is open source and has 1.4K forks alread. So it should be easy to ramp that up to several thousand more, which can make it harder to stop? or am i being naive?

ktallett

I don't quite understand the need for nitter. I don't use X/Twitter due to what it accesses, not due to the front end.

EagnaIonat

I quit twitter soon after Elon took over and the neo-Nazi spam. Nothing of value was lost. Why not invest your time on better services.

accountrequired

>"or its successor" So long and thanks for all the fish.

herunan

What's the point? Nitter already won since It's open source. Anyone can just fork it and/or self-host it. eg: https://status.d420.de or https://xxcancel.com

stevefan1999

IANAL but unfortunately the law isn't really in Nitter's favor, as Elon could easily win the fight that Nitter can be considered as a read-only scrapping mirror, which itself makes total sense why Elon tries to C&D it since it is a loophole for other AI companies, probably especially OpenAI, to read the feeds for free. tl;dr Elon's ground can easily be that there is an official paid service that let's you read the feeds unrestricted (this will be a good counter-challenge however IMO) while Nitter tried to run around it. So the First Amendment defense from Nitter should be shit outta luck

petcat

It's impossible to know what this "legal advice" was, but it was always a dubious claim. The software project itself is probably fine. The legal risk is always going to be with the person that hosts it with the intention of facilitating the unauthorized access of Twitter's website. Seems like that could run afoul of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Those people should seek their own legal advice and not listen to anything this guy says.

hrideshmg

I am quite surprised by the number of comments critical of Nitter. I personally don't use it but frontends like these are very important in today's day and age. As sad as it is, the majority of online discourse nowadays happens on platforms whose algorithms and interfaces are controlled by corporations. A project like Nitter probably can't run legally, and that's okay. Custom mobile clients for Reddit still work after they banned it, life finds a way. I'm all for funding these projects though because at the end of the day, someone has to build it.

medler

This is very clearly an attempt by X to use the legal system to harass people doing perfectly legal things. The chilling effect on speech is the whole point

throwaway3060

Perhaps Musk is in his legal right to turn Twitter into a walled garden, but it certainly seems like false advertising to me after he kept describing his model as a public square. You can be a public square or a walled garden, but not both.

mikae1

Nitter is a hydra. One instance goes down, another one goes up. https://status.d420.de/

erelong

What is this, can't EFF or FSF or some related org provide legal aid And does the access act as a kind of fair use? Not like Nitter is making money from the access to the content

apgwoz

I don’t use Twitter, but if I did, I would certainly want to archive the content of my timeline so I could refer back to it for journalistic reasons, perhaps, via a browser extension? No reason to lock down my “ownership” here, because it’d only be public posts. There are obvious fair use reasons for when I want to quote someone when I do acts of journalism. I’d even be willing to share my archive with anyone else, and advertise the tweet_ids I have in case another journalist wanted them. Sort of like… I dunno, napster? That’d be great.

brcmthrowaway

The reason random accounts are popping up saying to use X is because they now get checks for posting engagement bait.

user01293780123

Thanks for posting here and drawing my attention. Donating 1.22221337 BTC to the address listed on their page right now.

1vuio0pswjnm7

Can the trademark claim(s) be ignored Why continue to use a name, "Nitter", that looks and sounds like "Twitter"