6 ms·

Plurk’s official response to Microsoft’s apology

97 points by pkrumins 17y ago

michael_dorfman 17y ago
Not good. First of all, sending out a press release saying that you are still considering all your options is a bit silly. "We're thinking about it" isn't really news. But more importantly, that fact that they are still considering legal options is a bad sign. The fact that Microsoft responded with a quick and unequivocal apology bought them a lot of good will. Even if Plurk were to succeed in a lawsuit, it will be a big distraction and might possibly hurt the brand. If I were in Plurk's shoes, I'd be sitting down with the Microsoft China folks to discuss acquisition/partnership. Clearly Plurk has something Microsoft wants, and now might be the best time to get them to pay for it. But you're not going to do that by holding the threat of a lawsuit over their heads.
- ivenkys 17y ago
  Absolutely. I wonder if any of these guys have ever done any business before. This is business (startup, technology or otherwise) 101 , you have the crowd support/goodwill, you have the apology from the bigger party, they obviously like what you do. Shut up,sit down and talk money.
anigbrowl 17y ago
Even I, as a co-founder of Plurk, have to write this press release myself. You poor dear. Look guys, quit while you're ahead. Everyone knows you are not going to sue Microsoft because the legal fees would be bigger than your market cap. The smart thing would be to take this down and say only that you're 'discussing it with them. Let MS takes you out on a date and give them some room to make it up to you. Sometimes the best negotiation strategy is to keep your mouth shut and let the other side do all the talking. This missive sounds petulant.
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
- ryanelkins 17y ago
  I'm just glad to see that most of HN isn't riding the conspiracy train with them. It's like they imagine Bill Gates personally copying their code while cackling maniacally. I think it was fairly obvious that the whole thing was an accident (meaning it was not Microsoft's intention to have developer's steal Plurk's code). Microsoft gave a surprisingly refreshing apology and took the site down. This is quickly becoming an object lesson in how crowds can turn against you.
  - deleted 17y ago
    [deleted]
  - stse 17y ago
    I think most people here agree that your business should be based on making innovative products, not imitation nor litigation.
    - elblanco 17y ago
      I hope no one from SCO is here.
    - jimmybot 17y ago
      I'm not a legal expert, but like others, I don't think they have much of a legal argument. But isn't "your business should be based on making innovative products" exactly what Plurk is complaining about? Although Microsoft was caught lifting code, what if they didn't copy so exactly? Their intention was clearly reimplementing Plurk for China, probably without all the Taiwan users that would make it a sure thing that Plurk is banned. How is that really any better from an ethos perspective? Plurk is very clearly satisfying some kind of niche in parts of the world that Twitter does not (maybe its the emoticons or easy way for viewing replies in the web interface? or the idea of karma?). I suppose not innovating is one way of running a business, but it's one I say "boo" to.
- webwright 17y ago
  Agreed. This is weak on Plurk's part. How were they harmed? Microsoft screwed up and hired a shady vendor who did a shady thing. As soon as they realized what happened, they owned it, fired the vendor, and shut down the site. Just because Microsoft has money doesn't mean that Plurk deserves it.
  - TallGuyShort 17y ago
    I think you've hit the nail on the head - and that's exactly why Plurk is going about it the way they have: They're not expecting a proper legal repercussion to take place - they want publicity for themselves, and bad press for MS. In his previous blog post he begged for this to become viral.
    - jamesbritt 17y ago
      " they want publicity for themselves, and bad press for MS. In his previous blog post he begged for this to become viral." But the upshot is that it's creating bad press for Plurk, because they're now coming off, in the words of another poster here, as petulant. I read Microsoft's statement, then saw the Plurk comment, and I thought they came off as a bit childish. Microsoft seems to have done the proper, stand-up thing here. Shake hands and be done.
      - roundsquare 17y ago
        Seems like they misjudged. They wanted to balance out between getting sympathy and wining too much. Looks like they crossed that line.
  - cubtastic71 17y ago
    Agreed again - if Microsoft was in beta too - it can be argued that the service was never fully offered to the public either, making the case even weaker...
    - ivankirigin 17y ago
      beta badge != unavailable. A badge is actually a bit of a joke - a marketing tool itself so you can later say "our service that has been launched for years is out of beta!"
- fiaz 17y ago
  I agree with you. For the sake of completeness, what would Microsoft do if the tables were turned?
  - by 17y ago
    In the case of Tomato Garden they reported Hong Lei to the authorities who arrested and imprisoned him for three and a half years along with lesser sentences for his associates. But it seems to hinge on whether the theft has made any money. http://www.chinaipmagazine.com/en/journal-show.asp?id=429 http://www.chinaipmagazine.com/en/journal-show.asp?id=429 http://www.gomyhosting.com/windows/html/managedhosting/505.html http://www.gomyhosting.com/windows/html/managedhosting/505.h... What would be interesting would be the brief that Microsoft China gave to the sub-contractor. Did they encourage the copyright infringement?
- chubbard 17y ago
  But, just as you point out they can't sue them accepting their apology doesn't guarantee they won't see Juku 2.0 again in a month or two. They got basically a stay of execution on this, but they don't have MS saying we won't be in the market. I would be pursuing options of a lawsuit and talks with MS at the same time. If talks break down with MS I'd want have researched that option. Even if it's just a negotiation trick should it get really dirty.
hubb 17y ago
hah these guys are burning through their sympathy pretty damn quickly.
- chaosmachine 17y ago
  It's a bit of a train wreck. They're snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
  - dagw 17y ago
    I don't know about anybody else, but I hadn't ever heard of plurk before this. They could have leveraged this for some great PR ("come see the site that is so awesome that even Microsoft wants to rip it off"), instead they throw a fit and destroy any PR and goodwill options they might have had.
- dtf 17y ago
  Odd to see Microsoft's PR guys get it (quick, sincere apology minus any defensive legalese), while the injured party, a startup, doesn't.
edmccaffrey 17y ago
What an idiotic statement. A judge would look at the actual damages; launching the site for an extremely short time in a country that they are not allowed to operate in just couldn't have caused them much actual financial damage. How much are the actual damages? Zero (what seems likely without more information) times whatever punitive multiplier you can think of isn't much at all. I'd say they fully deserve to lose a legal battle that drains tons of money, so that MS can buy their then nearly-bankrupt company for pennies on the dollar, if they aren't smart enough to drop it when they have already benefited from the situation.
- micks56 17y ago
  This is an inaccurate statement of the law. Chapter 17 of the United States Code goes into voluminous detail of that actual law. Actual damages includes costs saved by the infringer. Courts can also impose punitive damages, which is not necessarily a multiplier, as well as costs and attorney's fees. All of this assumes that US jurisdiction applies.
  - houseabsolute 17y ago
    The infringer hasn't exactly saved any costs, now, has he?
    - micks56 17y ago
      If the infringer did not have to incur development costs, or reduced development costs, those would be saved costs and included as part of the damage award. I will also add that the plaintiff only needs to enter the infringer's gross revenues of the entire company into evidence. It is up to the infringer to justify deductible expenses from non-infringing business in order to arrive at the profits gained from infringement. Once again, this is assuming the US has jurisdiction.
- xsmasher 17y ago
  There are damages - Plurk has a right to any money derived from copying their code, including any payments made to the evil outsourcing company and any advertising revenue (gross) that the site brought in during its short life. That being said, suing MS can only lead to ruin. If they could keep a BS case like SCO on life support for so long, they can certainly keep this running long enough to bankrupt Plurk. I don't know about the legal system in Taiwan though - maybe they could get a judgment against Microsoft before the universe cools.
ErrantX 17y ago
This isn't a smart move at all. I can empathize with his "pain"; and it certainly leaves a bad taste to let this just slide straight off. But the problem is I think that there are considerations: such as the fact it was ripped off by a Chinese contractor (which as has already been discussed at length, is something not uncommon), the fact that Microsoft obviously screwed up - but dont appear to have done this maliciously. If anything I would approach it with discussions to license to code; MS now have a user base in a market that Plurk is banned. That is commercially viable for both parties.
thaumaturgy 17y ago
...right. They're too poor to afford a copyeditor for their press releases (freelancers do this for cheap), but they're gonna sue Microsoft? This has just gotten embarrassing now.
DrJokepu 17y ago
I've got the feeling that this is going to be one of those David vs Goliath battles where Goliath breaks the neck of David after five seconds without breaking a sweat and then everyone goes home with a sad face.
- ebrenes 17y ago
  I'm not even sure about the sad face part given the other comments so far. Seems Goliath didn't want to make a fight of it, but David insisted on having his satisfaction.
  - DrJokepu 17y ago
    Exactly. They're in the very rare position of enjoying the goodwill of Microsoft. This is like winning the lottery for a start-up, only better. But no, they charge instead. Incredible.
Tichy 17y ago
They should consider paying Microsoft instead, for the free marketing they received. I had all but forgotten about Plurk before this, and for many people, this incident might be the first time they heard about Plurk.
- sree_nair 17y ago
  Totally agree. This is the first time I have heard of them. And They could use this publicity to good use rather than hanging on to the issue.
whalesalad 17y ago
First of all, like most of the people on HN I too agree these guys are getting a little sappy. Give it a rest and stop crying. This all sounds like the new American dream to me, wait for someone to create an accident and take advantage of it by suing the pants off of them. Your company is worthless, so you're going to sue Microsoft to make your millions? Second... Plurk won't let me sign up with a MobileMe email address =( - http://grab.by/1fum http://grab.by/1fum
- srj532 17y ago
  I agree. The new American dream... I hope that I am a victim someday... er... wait, according to society we are all already victims... let me start over. I hope and dream that someday I am the victim of a wealthy perpetrator so that I can sue them and become rich.
  - sfk 17y ago
    I questioned your 2 hour old account elsewhere in this thread, but this settles it: flagged for trolling or possibly even astroturfing.
- qeorge 17y ago
  Stop being a jerk. The Plurk guys got hosed. I agree that this press release is a mistake, but I can see where they're coming from. "wait for someone to create an accident and take advantage of it by suing the pants off of them" That is in no way what Plurk did. "Your company is worthless, so you're going to sue Microsoft to make your millions?" Obviously the company is not worthless, or presumably MS wouldn't have bothered ripping it off.
elblanco 17y ago
Maybe this is a good opportunity to discuss being acquired by MS. Apparently they like your idea so much they want to have something like. Just buying the technology would be a reasonable move for them.
motters 17y ago
It seems strange to me that although Microsoft is the company at fault here many of the commentators seem to be basically praising Microsoft and blaming/deriding the guys whose code was plagiarized.
- srj532 17y ago
  Microsoft did not steal the code. an Employee or contractor did. They, the individual(s) that stole the code is who is guilty here. As soon as Microsoft was made aware of the situation they pulled the offending code/software immediately.
  - mbreese 17y ago
    Wrong Wrong Wrong. Microsoft is guilty of it because they are the ones who published the code/product as their own. They hired someone to do the work. Yes, that person ripped of Plurk, but Microsoft failed to verify their contractor's work. That makes them culpable. Plurk was ripped off by Microsoft. Full Stop. Now, Microsoft has it's own options with respect to that contractor, but their swift response doesn't erase Microsoft's liability.
    - NikkiA 17y ago
      Lets also remember that that is the 2nd time in 6 months MS has been caught out on this kind of thing, and the 2nd time they've used the 'but a contractor...' excuse...
      - dangrossman 17y ago
        When your company hires some 30,000 contractors a year, using that "excuse" twice seems quite legitimate.
    - palish 17y ago
      Are you kidding? If I hire a contractor to do work, and that work is done (meaning I can look at and interact with the product) then I'm not going to waste valuable time "verifying" that product against every other product on the market. Especially against other "beta" products that only a niche few (relatively speaking) have heard about. That would be a dumb use of time. Why? Because even if the contractor did rip off the code, (which should be so unthinkable as to not even be an issue,) all I have to do is say "hey, the contractor did this, not me -- I've pulled the plug and fired the contractor." End of discussion. That's exactly what Microsoft did, and now Plurk is pushing the issue too far. Plurk did get a ton of free PR from this. For thousands or tens of thousands of people, this will be the first time they've heard of Plurk. To claim that Plurk was somehow "damaged" amidst all of this is just stupid. Yeah, they were ripped off. But nobody got rich off of it. There is no money to chase down. Plurk could net themselves way more money (or rather, any money at all) by trying to generate new profits by taking advantage of all the free PR they got. But they're throwing a hissy fit after Microsoft has done their part in fixing the issue (pulling the plug on a product that wasn't even released yet anyway). As others here have said: what a waste.
srj532 17y ago
Plurk should settle down, Microsoft helped them! Microsoft gave Plurk a lot of free marketing and exposure from this incident and Microsoft has pulled their product and won't be competing now.
sree_nair 17y ago
So, What do you guys want microsoft to do now?. Can you tell us what is the ideal response you expect from microsoft ?.
icey 17y ago
With all eyes on you, the right move would have been to accept Microsoft's apology, and thank them for seeing how great Plurk is - after all, imitation is the best form of flattery. Then it would have been a good chance to mention how to sign up for Plurk. What a wasted marketing opportunity.
grellas 17y ago
The logic behind this might mean that Plurk is aiming to force Microsoft into some form of settlement by which MS stipulates to certain restrictions on its future activities as a condition to obtaining a release, the spirit of which would be along the following lines: "you, as a willful infringer caught red-handed already, agree that, in the event you should ever again use any code or interface remotely resembling ours, we can apply to a court for immediate injunctive relief." Obviously, I am speculating but the last paragraph of the press release tends in my view to support this theme, implying that these founders have a perception this was not at all innocent on Microsoft's part but instead something quite calculated. This also may constitute gamesmanship by which Plurk is trying to create enough of a nuisance to force Microsoft to consider acquiring it as a way of clearing the way for it to enter this market in the future. This may indeed be nothing more than bad judgment by these founders, as the comments here suggest, but it must have some logic behind it (wise or not) and that logic may well run along the above lines.
orblivion 17y ago
The open source projects I see on their site aren't under AGPL, they're not even GPL, they're BSD. What's the issue with using it? Also, unless they're following a different credo than the rest of the open source world, why are they complaining about "stealing" UI? I thought people in Open Source didn't believe in software patents?
- freetard 17y ago
  I don't think Plurk is open source.
jorsh 17y ago
Wow HN, talk about blaming the victim here. I guess Plurk was totally asking for it?
- dschobel 17y ago
  The consensus position seems to be that they should accept MS' apology and move forward with their world-domination plans with their obviously desirable UI rather than moaning about some vague notion of damage done to them for the brief time that MS had a clone of their UI up. They either need to sue MS if they really think they've been aggrieved or get over it. Moaning on their blog accomplishes absolutely nothing positive and has started to lose them sympathy. See the series which ran on steveblank.com about a competitor stealing their IP which was prominently featured here as an example about how to use adversity in a constructive manner. part1: http://steveblank.com/2009/12/03/someone-stole-my-startup-idea-%E2%80%93-part-1-are-those-my-initials/ http://steveblank.com/2009/12/03/someone-stole-my-startup-id... part2: http://steveblank.com/2009/12/07/someone-stole-my-startup-idea-%E2%80%93-part-2-they-raised-money-with-my-slides/ http://steveblank.com/2009/12/07/someone-stole-my-startup-id... part3: http://steveblank.com/2009/12/10/someone-stole-my-startup-idea-%E2%80%93-part-3-the-best-defense-is-a-good-strategy/ http://steveblank.com/2009/12/10/someone-stole-my-startup-id... Dwelling on adversity with a "woe is me" attitude is fundamentally antithetical to the entrepreneur/startup mentality as evidenced by the hostility they're starting to encounter in these comments.
- gloob 17y ago
  Plurk isn't being blamed for having its code ripped-off. Plurk is being blamed for being stupid. Two different things.
- anigbrowl 17y ago
  Of course not. If you'll forgive a metaphor: A hard-working craftsman is selling his goods at market, when a thief in servant's livery grabs something from his stall and runs away. Leaving his son to guard the stall, he pursues the thief, following him to the house of a rich man, where guards forbid him to enter. He wails at the loss of his precious goods, attracting the sympathy of a crowd who have followed the chase out of curiosity. Hearing the commotion, the rich man comes to the gate and is embarrassed. He fires the dishonest servant and apologizes fulsomely to the craftsman, praising his handiwork. Now, should the humble craftsman berate the rich man in front of a crowd for the fact of his poor hiring decision, or compliment him on his wealth and taste? Would it help if the rich man was reputed to have a beautiful daughter with a substantial dowry, who had been unable to find a suitable husband?
hello00768 17y ago
welcome to: http://www.wowowbiz.com/ http://www.wowowbiz.com/ The website wholesale for many kinds of fashion shoes, like the nike,jorda-n,prada,ad-idas, also including the jeans,shir-ts,bags,ha-t and the decorations. All the products are free shipping, and the the price is competitive, and also can accept the paypal payment.,after the payment, can ship within short time. http://www.wowowbiz.com/ http://www.wowowbiz.com/
jongraehl 17y ago
"I want my two dollars!"
kyro 17y ago
Ah, I was rooting for you guys. I really was. But you played this in the most unwise way. You are nothing more than a speck on the bottom of Microsoft's foot. You're not even a gnat causing them the tiniest bit of annoyance. It's harsh, but reality. And what could have turned out to be an amazing opportunity to potentially strike a deal with MS will end up with you perhaps with a bit more publicity, but severed ties because you're trying to be sharks. You've got to bite your tongue and subdue your emotions at times to get ahead. That's a general life lesson.
jsz0 17y ago
Sounds like Plurk should taken the horrible burden off the CEO from doing public relations all by himself. He's not very good at it. They've gone from exploited underdog to greedy lawsuit trolls pretty quickly here. Whatever small amount of traffic Microsoft's regional site took away from Plurk was totally offset by the free publicity. They should have sent Microsoft a Thank You card.
marsmatrix 17y ago
I suspect the company was immediately inundated with "helpful" legal advice when this went to press. While everyone at HN (and probably the Plurk founders) would settle and go back to writing tech, suing Microsoft is every trial lawyer's dream. I think it's only fair for Microsoft to settle since they did have the service up for a few days but a full lawsuit is clearly OTL. That said, I'm sure both companies will come out unscathed. The one group I see being hurt by this incident are the Chinese contractors. There were a large number of posts here and on /. stereotyping Chinese hackers as cheaters immediately after this incident. Really, people, think about what you're saying.

97 points by pkrumins 17y ago

Not good. First of all, sending out a press release saying that you are still considering all your options is a bit silly. "We're thinking about it" isn't really news. But more importantly, that fact that they are still considering legal options is a bad sign. The fact that Microsoft responded with a quick and unequivocal apology bought them a lot of good will. Even if Plurk were to succeed in a lawsuit, it will be a big distraction and might possibly hurt the brand. If I were in Plurk's shoes, I'd be sitting down with the Microsoft China folks to discuss acquisition/partnership. Clearly Plurk has something Microsoft wants, and now might be the best time to get them to pay for it. But you're not going to do that by holding the threat of a lawsuit over their heads.

ivenkys 17y ago
Absolutely. I wonder if any of these guys have ever done any business before. This is business (startup, technology or otherwise) 101 , you have the crowd support/goodwill, you have the apology from the bigger party, they obviously like what you do. Shut up,sit down and talk money.

anigbrowl 17y ago

Even I, as a co-founder of Plurk, have to write this press release myself. You poor dear. Look guys, quit while you're ahead. Everyone knows you are not going to sue Microsoft because the legal fees would be bigger than your market cap. The smart thing would be to take this down and say only that you're 'discussing it with them. Let MS takes you out on a date and give them some room to make it up to you. Sometimes the best negotiation strategy is to keep your mouth shut and let the other side do all the talking. This missive sounds petulant.

deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
ryanelkins 17y ago
I'm just glad to see that most of HN isn't riding the conspiracy train with them. It's like they imagine Bill Gates personally copying their code while cackling maniacally. I think it was fairly obvious that the whole thing was an accident (meaning it was not Microsoft's intention to have developer's steal Plurk's code). Microsoft gave a surprisingly refreshing apology and took the site down. This is quickly becoming an object lesson in how crowds can turn against you.
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
- stse 17y ago
  I think most people here agree that your business should be based on making innovative products, not imitation nor litigation.
  - elblanco 17y ago
    I hope no one from SCO is here.
  - jimmybot 17y ago
    I'm not a legal expert, but like others, I don't think they have much of a legal argument. But isn't "your business should be based on making innovative products" exactly what Plurk is complaining about? Although Microsoft was caught lifting code, what if they didn't copy so exactly? Their intention was clearly reimplementing Plurk for China, probably without all the Taiwan users that would make it a sure thing that Plurk is banned. How is that really any better from an ethos perspective? Plurk is very clearly satisfying some kind of niche in parts of the world that Twitter does not (maybe its the emoticons or easy way for viewing replies in the web interface? or the idea of karma?). I suppose not innovating is one way of running a business, but it's one I say "boo" to.
webwright 17y ago
Agreed. This is weak on Plurk's part. How were they harmed? Microsoft screwed up and hired a shady vendor who did a shady thing. As soon as they realized what happened, they owned it, fired the vendor, and shut down the site. Just because Microsoft has money doesn't mean that Plurk deserves it.
- TallGuyShort 17y ago
  I think you've hit the nail on the head - and that's exactly why Plurk is going about it the way they have: They're not expecting a proper legal repercussion to take place - they want publicity for themselves, and bad press for MS. In his previous blog post he begged for this to become viral.
  - jamesbritt 17y ago
    " they want publicity for themselves, and bad press for MS. In his previous blog post he begged for this to become viral." But the upshot is that it's creating bad press for Plurk, because they're now coming off, in the words of another poster here, as petulant. I read Microsoft's statement, then saw the Plurk comment, and I thought they came off as a bit childish. Microsoft seems to have done the proper, stand-up thing here. Shake hands and be done.
    - roundsquare 17y ago
      Seems like they misjudged. They wanted to balance out between getting sympathy and wining too much. Looks like they crossed that line.
- cubtastic71 17y ago
  Agreed again - if Microsoft was in beta too - it can be argued that the service was never fully offered to the public either, making the case even weaker...
  - ivankirigin 17y ago
    beta badge != unavailable. A badge is actually a bit of a joke - a marketing tool itself so you can later say "our service that has been launched for years is out of beta!"
fiaz 17y ago
I agree with you. For the sake of completeness, what would Microsoft do if the tables were turned?
- by 17y ago
  In the case of Tomato Garden they reported Hong Lei to the authorities who arrested and imprisoned him for three and a half years along with lesser sentences for his associates. But it seems to hinge on whether the theft has made any money. http://www.chinaipmagazine.com/en/journal-show.asp?id=429 http://www.chinaipmagazine.com/en/journal-show.asp?id=429 http://www.gomyhosting.com/windows/html/managedhosting/505.html http://www.gomyhosting.com/windows/html/managedhosting/505.h... What would be interesting would be the brief that Microsoft China gave to the sub-contractor. Did they encourage the copyright infringement?
chubbard 17y ago
But, just as you point out they can't sue them accepting their apology doesn't guarantee they won't see Juku 2.0 again in a month or two. They got basically a stay of execution on this, but they don't have MS saying we won't be in the market. I would be pursuing options of a lawsuit and talks with MS at the same time. If talks break down with MS I'd want have researched that option. Even if it's just a negotiation trick should it get really dirty.

hubb 17y ago

hah these guys are burning through their sympathy pretty damn quickly.

chaosmachine 17y ago
It's a bit of a train wreck. They're snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
- dagw 17y ago
  I don't know about anybody else, but I hadn't ever heard of plurk before this. They could have leveraged this for some great PR ("come see the site that is so awesome that even Microsoft wants to rip it off"), instead they throw a fit and destroy any PR and goodwill options they might have had.
dtf 17y ago
Odd to see Microsoft's PR guys get it (quick, sincere apology minus any defensive legalese), while the injured party, a startup, doesn't.

edmccaffrey 17y ago

What an idiotic statement. A judge would look at the actual damages; launching the site for an extremely short time in a country that they are not allowed to operate in just couldn't have caused them much actual financial damage. How much are the actual damages? Zero (what seems likely without more information) times whatever punitive multiplier you can think of isn't much at all. I'd say they fully deserve to lose a legal battle that drains tons of money, so that MS can buy their then nearly-bankrupt company for pennies on the dollar, if they aren't smart enough to drop it when they have already benefited from the situation.

micks56 17y ago
This is an inaccurate statement of the law. Chapter 17 of the United States Code goes into voluminous detail of that actual law. Actual damages includes costs saved by the infringer. Courts can also impose punitive damages, which is not necessarily a multiplier, as well as costs and attorney's fees. All of this assumes that US jurisdiction applies.
- houseabsolute 17y ago
  The infringer hasn't exactly saved any costs, now, has he?
  - micks56 17y ago
    If the infringer did not have to incur development costs, or reduced development costs, those would be saved costs and included as part of the damage award. I will also add that the plaintiff only needs to enter the infringer's gross revenues of the entire company into evidence. It is up to the infringer to justify deductible expenses from non-infringing business in order to arrive at the profits gained from infringement. Once again, this is assuming the US has jurisdiction.
xsmasher 17y ago
There are damages - Plurk has a right to any money derived from copying their code, including any payments made to the evil outsourcing company and any advertising revenue (gross) that the site brought in during its short life. That being said, suing MS can only lead to ruin. If they could keep a BS case like SCO on life support for so long, they can certainly keep this running long enough to bankrupt Plurk. I don't know about the legal system in Taiwan though - maybe they could get a judgment against Microsoft before the universe cools.

ErrantX 17y ago

This isn't a smart move at all. I can empathize with his "pain"; and it certainly leaves a bad taste to let this just slide straight off. But the problem is I think that there are considerations: such as the fact it was ripped off by a Chinese contractor (which as has already been discussed at length, is something not uncommon), the fact that Microsoft obviously screwed up - but dont appear to have done this maliciously. If anything I would approach it with discussions to license to code; MS now have a user base in a market that Plurk is banned. That is commercially viable for both parties.

thaumaturgy 17y ago

...right. They're too poor to afford a copyeditor for their press releases (freelancers do this for cheap), but they're gonna sue Microsoft? This has just gotten embarrassing now.

DrJokepu 17y ago

I've got the feeling that this is going to be one of those David vs Goliath battles where Goliath breaks the neck of David after five seconds without breaking a sweat and then everyone goes home with a sad face.

ebrenes 17y ago
I'm not even sure about the sad face part given the other comments so far. Seems Goliath didn't want to make a fight of it, but David insisted on having his satisfaction.
- DrJokepu 17y ago
  Exactly. They're in the very rare position of enjoying the goodwill of Microsoft. This is like winning the lottery for a start-up, only better. But no, they charge instead. Incredible.

Tichy 17y ago

They should consider paying Microsoft instead, for the free marketing they received. I had all but forgotten about Plurk before this, and for many people, this incident might be the first time they heard about Plurk.

sree_nair 17y ago
Totally agree. This is the first time I have heard of them. And They could use this publicity to good use rather than hanging on to the issue.

whalesalad 17y ago

First of all, like most of the people on HN I too agree these guys are getting a little sappy. Give it a rest and stop crying. This all sounds like the new American dream to me, wait for someone to create an accident and take advantage of it by suing the pants off of them. Your company is worthless, so you're going to sue Microsoft to make your millions? Second... Plurk won't let me sign up with a MobileMe email address =( - http://grab.by/1fum http://grab.by/1fum

srj532 17y ago
I agree. The new American dream... I hope that I am a victim someday... er... wait, according to society we are all already victims... let me start over. I hope and dream that someday I am the victim of a wealthy perpetrator so that I can sue them and become rich.
- sfk 17y ago
  I questioned your 2 hour old account elsewhere in this thread, but this settles it: flagged for trolling or possibly even astroturfing.
qeorge 17y ago
Stop being a jerk. The Plurk guys got hosed. I agree that this press release is a mistake, but I can see where they're coming from. "wait for someone to create an accident and take advantage of it by suing the pants off of them" That is in no way what Plurk did. "Your company is worthless, so you're going to sue Microsoft to make your millions?" Obviously the company is not worthless, or presumably MS wouldn't have bothered ripping it off.

elblanco 17y ago

Maybe this is a good opportunity to discuss being acquired by MS. Apparently they like your idea so much they want to have something like. Just buying the technology would be a reasonable move for them.

motters 17y ago

It seems strange to me that although Microsoft is the company at fault here many of the commentators seem to be basically praising Microsoft and blaming/deriding the guys whose code was plagiarized.

srj532 17y ago
Microsoft did not steal the code. an Employee or contractor did. They, the individual(s) that stole the code is who is guilty here. As soon as Microsoft was made aware of the situation they pulled the offending code/software immediately.
- mbreese 17y ago
  Wrong Wrong Wrong. Microsoft is guilty of it because they are the ones who published the code/product as their own. They hired someone to do the work. Yes, that person ripped of Plurk, but Microsoft failed to verify their contractor's work. That makes them culpable. Plurk was ripped off by Microsoft. Full Stop. Now, Microsoft has it's own options with respect to that contractor, but their swift response doesn't erase Microsoft's liability.
  - NikkiA 17y ago
    Lets also remember that that is the 2nd time in 6 months MS has been caught out on this kind of thing, and the 2nd time they've used the 'but a contractor...' excuse...
    - dangrossman 17y ago
      When your company hires some 30,000 contractors a year, using that "excuse" twice seems quite legitimate.
  - palish 17y ago
    Are you kidding? If I hire a contractor to do work, and that work is done (meaning I can look at and interact with the product) then I'm not going to waste valuable time "verifying" that product against every other product on the market. Especially against other "beta" products that only a niche few (relatively speaking) have heard about. That would be a dumb use of time. Why? Because even if the contractor did rip off the code, (which should be so unthinkable as to not even be an issue,) all I have to do is say "hey, the contractor did this, not me -- I've pulled the plug and fired the contractor." End of discussion. That's exactly what Microsoft did, and now Plurk is pushing the issue too far. Plurk did get a ton of free PR from this. For thousands or tens of thousands of people, this will be the first time they've heard of Plurk. To claim that Plurk was somehow "damaged" amidst all of this is just stupid. Yeah, they were ripped off. But nobody got rich off of it. There is no money to chase down. Plurk could net themselves way more money (or rather, any money at all) by trying to generate new profits by taking advantage of all the free PR they got. But they're throwing a hissy fit after Microsoft has done their part in fixing the issue (pulling the plug on a product that wasn't even released yet anyway). As others here have said: what a waste.

srj532 17y ago

Plurk should settle down, Microsoft helped them! Microsoft gave Plurk a lot of free marketing and exposure from this incident and Microsoft has pulled their product and won't be competing now.

sree_nair 17y ago

So, What do you guys want microsoft to do now?. Can you tell us what is the ideal response you expect from microsoft ?.

icey 17y ago

With all eyes on you, the right move would have been to accept Microsoft's apology, and thank them for seeing how great Plurk is - after all, imitation is the best form of flattery. Then it would have been a good chance to mention how to sign up for Plurk. What a wasted marketing opportunity.

grellas 17y ago

The logic behind this might mean that Plurk is aiming to force Microsoft into some form of settlement by which MS stipulates to certain restrictions on its future activities as a condition to obtaining a release, the spirit of which would be along the following lines: "you, as a willful infringer caught red-handed already, agree that, in the event you should ever again use any code or interface remotely resembling ours, we can apply to a court for immediate injunctive relief." Obviously, I am speculating but the last paragraph of the press release tends in my view to support this theme, implying that these founders have a perception this was not at all innocent on Microsoft's part but instead something quite calculated. This also may constitute gamesmanship by which Plurk is trying to create enough of a nuisance to force Microsoft to consider acquiring it as a way of clearing the way for it to enter this market in the future. This may indeed be nothing more than bad judgment by these founders, as the comments here suggest, but it must have some logic behind it (wise or not) and that logic may well run along the above lines.

orblivion 17y ago

The open source projects I see on their site aren't under AGPL, they're not even GPL, they're BSD. What's the issue with using it? Also, unless they're following a different credo than the rest of the open source world, why are they complaining about "stealing" UI? I thought people in Open Source didn't believe in software patents?

freetard 17y ago
I don't think Plurk is open source.

jorsh 17y ago

Wow HN, talk about blaming the victim here. I guess Plurk was totally asking for it?

dschobel 17y ago
The consensus position seems to be that they should accept MS' apology and move forward with their world-domination plans with their obviously desirable UI rather than moaning about some vague notion of damage done to them for the brief time that MS had a clone of their UI up. They either need to sue MS if they really think they've been aggrieved or get over it. Moaning on their blog accomplishes absolutely nothing positive and has started to lose them sympathy. See the series which ran on steveblank.com about a competitor stealing their IP which was prominently featured here as an example about how to use adversity in a constructive manner. part1: http://steveblank.com/2009/12/03/someone-stole-my-startup-idea-%E2%80%93-part-1-are-those-my-initials/ http://steveblank.com/2009/12/03/someone-stole-my-startup-id... part2: http://steveblank.com/2009/12/07/someone-stole-my-startup-idea-%E2%80%93-part-2-they-raised-money-with-my-slides/ http://steveblank.com/2009/12/07/someone-stole-my-startup-id... part3: http://steveblank.com/2009/12/10/someone-stole-my-startup-idea-%E2%80%93-part-3-the-best-defense-is-a-good-strategy/ http://steveblank.com/2009/12/10/someone-stole-my-startup-id... Dwelling on adversity with a "woe is me" attitude is fundamentally antithetical to the entrepreneur/startup mentality as evidenced by the hostility they're starting to encounter in these comments.
gloob 17y ago
Plurk isn't being blamed for having its code ripped-off. Plurk is being blamed for being stupid. Two different things.
anigbrowl 17y ago
Of course not. If you'll forgive a metaphor: A hard-working craftsman is selling his goods at market, when a thief in servant's livery grabs something from his stall and runs away. Leaving his son to guard the stall, he pursues the thief, following him to the house of a rich man, where guards forbid him to enter. He wails at the loss of his precious goods, attracting the sympathy of a crowd who have followed the chase out of curiosity. Hearing the commotion, the rich man comes to the gate and is embarrassed. He fires the dishonest servant and apologizes fulsomely to the craftsman, praising his handiwork. Now, should the humble craftsman berate the rich man in front of a crowd for the fact of his poor hiring decision, or compliment him on his wealth and taste? Would it help if the rich man was reputed to have a beautiful daughter with a substantial dowry, who had been unable to find a suitable husband?

hello00768 17y ago

welcome to: http://www.wowowbiz.com/ http://www.wowowbiz.com/ The website wholesale for many kinds of fashion shoes, like the nike,jorda-n,prada,ad-idas, also including the jeans,shir-ts,bags,ha-t and the decorations. All the products are free shipping, and the the price is competitive, and also can accept the paypal payment.,after the payment, can ship within short time. http://www.wowowbiz.com/ http://www.wowowbiz.com/

jongraehl 17y ago

"I want my two dollars!"

kyro 17y ago

Ah, I was rooting for you guys. I really was. But you played this in the most unwise way. You are nothing more than a speck on the bottom of Microsoft's foot. You're not even a gnat causing them the tiniest bit of annoyance. It's harsh, but reality. And what could have turned out to be an amazing opportunity to potentially strike a deal with MS will end up with you perhaps with a bit more publicity, but severed ties because you're trying to be sharks. You've got to bite your tongue and subdue your emotions at times to get ahead. That's a general life lesson.

jsz0 17y ago

Sounds like Plurk should taken the horrible burden off the CEO from doing public relations all by himself. He's not very good at it. They've gone from exploited underdog to greedy lawsuit trolls pretty quickly here. Whatever small amount of traffic Microsoft's regional site took away from Plurk was totally offset by the free publicity. They should have sent Microsoft a Thank You card.

marsmatrix 17y ago

I suspect the company was immediately inundated with "helpful" legal advice when this went to press. While everyone at HN (and probably the Plurk founders) would settle and go back to writing tech, suing Microsoft is every trial lawyer's dream. I think it's only fair for Microsoft to settle since they did have the service up for a few days but a full lawsuit is clearly OTL. That said, I'm sure both companies will come out unscathed. The one group I see being hurt by this incident are the Chinese contractors. There were a large number of posts here and on /. stereotyping Chinese hackers as cheaters immediately after this incident. Really, people, think about what you're saying.