7 ms·

I'm not affiliated with them so my thoughts are my own. I'd wager this is a last nuclear option before they lose their company to the lawsuit. If they can man

by cenal 11y ago

I'm not affiliated with them so my thoughts are my own. I'd wager this is a last nuclear option before they lose their company to the lawsuit. If they can manage to publicly shame the company suing them they stand a shot at keeping the company alive. Typically lawyers hate posts like this because it's public record now what happened and if any of this isn't true and provable 100% it can hurt them, a lot. There are some eDiscovery consulting companies like http://www.dcdatacorp.com http://www.dcdatacorp.com that go out and do forensic capture for law firms before it ever gets to a courtroom. They try and determine access to digital systems best as they can on behalf of the firms that hire them. Don't build a business on quicksand. Get a lawyer involved in formation to ensure your IP is clean and usable for your new venture. If in doubt. Scrap it all.

mikeshreds 11y ago
This is not a last nuclear option, and we're not in danger of losing our company to the lawsuit. Everything in the post is 100% true. We did get a lawyer involved when we started Shred Video, and are 100% sure our IP is clean and usable. It will take probably two years for the case to get fully adjudicated, and the legal recourse for preventing frivolous lawsuits like this is insufficient. Starting a startup is plenty hard enough without this kind of distraction, it's in all of our interest to dissuade larger companies from harassing startups in this way.
- 7Figures2Commas 11y ago
  > It will take probably two years for the case to get fully adjudicated... During which time many prospective investors, partners and customers won't want to touch you with a 10 foot pole. > ...and the legal recourse for preventing frivolous lawsuits like this is insufficient. To be honest, this doesn't look like a frivolous lawsuit, even if this goes to trial and is adjudicated in your favor. Your post indicates that you and your co-founder quit your jobs at Smule to start Shred. In your post, you detail the differences between some of the technology behind Smule's products and your own, but it is clear that Smule and Shred are in the same general space as far as technology is concerned. The intellectual property assignment agreements most employees sign cover inventions, processes, discoveries, etc. that are made or conceived of during their terms of employment. They often contain language referring to "the present or reasonably anticipated business" of the employer. While none of this means you can't leave an employer to start a business in the same space, matters like this can be incredibly messy. If you believe that your defense will be successful because you can prove you didn't steal code outright, you are being incredibly naive. It's not that simple.
  - jnbiche 11y ago
    > Your post indicates that you and your co-founder quit your jobs at Smule to start Shred. Are you insinuating that 2 employees quitting a company together and starting a company in the same "general space" is reasonable grounds for a lawsuit? > If you believe that your defense will be successful because you can prove you didn't steal code outright, you are being incredibly naive. It's not that simple. And that's to the shame of our legal system, and to the detriment of our country's economy.
    - 7Figures2Commas 11y ago
      > Are you insinuating that 2 employees quitting a company together and starting a company in the same "general space" is reasonable grounds for a lawsuit? If a former employer has reason to believe that the employees misappropriated intellectual property or otherwise violated the terms of their employment agreements in doing so, it has every right to seek to enforce its agreements and protect its interests. Like it or not, when employees leave to start a company in the same general space, claims of misappropriation are more likely. > And that's to the shame of our legal system, and to the detriment of our country's economy. How? If a source code comparison will not be dispositive of Smule's claims against Shred's co-founders, why would a court rely on a source code comparison? From what I can see, nobody has produced the actual filings in this case, so we don't know the exact claims, but other comments indicate that Smule isn't just claiming Shred's co-founders stole source code.
  - mikeshreds 11y ago
    In our case, we did not develop anything Shred-related (ideas or otherwise) while we were employed at Smule. So invention assignment is not at issue, because we did not moonlight on Shred Video while employed by Smule. I knew I wanted to build products for the GoPro audience, which is why I left Smule. Mark left for his own different reasons, and we only began prototyping on things that turned into Shred Video after he left Smule.
    - 7Figures2Commas 11y ago
      > In our case, we did not develop anything Shred-related (ideas or otherwise) while we were employed at Smule. So invention assignment is not at issue, because we did not moonlight on Shred Video while employed by Smule. Please recognize that assignment is likely an issue because Smule will almost certainly try to claim the opposite of what you're claiming. It doesn't mean that they will be able to prove their claims, but you should at least be aware of the fact that there are two sides to every legal dispute and both parties have the opportunity to make their case. If this isn't matter isn't settled, the legal process provides the means to sort it all out and you'll have the opportunity to evaluate the evidence supporting Smule's claims as part of the discovery process.

by cenal 11y ago

mikeshreds 11y ago

This is not a last nuclear option, and we're not in danger of losing our company to the lawsuit. Everything in the post is 100% true. We did get a lawyer involved when we started Shred Video, and are 100% sure our IP is clean and usable. It will take probably two years for the case to get fully adjudicated, and the legal recourse for preventing frivolous lawsuits like this is insufficient. Starting a startup is plenty hard enough without this kind of distraction, it's in all of our interest to dissuade larger companies from harassing startups in this way.

7Figures2Commas 11y ago
> It will take probably two years for the case to get fully adjudicated... During which time many prospective investors, partners and customers won't want to touch you with a 10 foot pole. > ...and the legal recourse for preventing frivolous lawsuits like this is insufficient. To be honest, this doesn't look like a frivolous lawsuit, even if this goes to trial and is adjudicated in your favor. Your post indicates that you and your co-founder quit your jobs at Smule to start Shred. In your post, you detail the differences between some of the technology behind Smule's products and your own, but it is clear that Smule and Shred are in the same general space as far as technology is concerned. The intellectual property assignment agreements most employees sign cover inventions, processes, discoveries, etc. that are made or conceived of during their terms of employment. They often contain language referring to "the present or reasonably anticipated business" of the employer. While none of this means you can't leave an employer to start a business in the same space, matters like this can be incredibly messy. If you believe that your defense will be successful because you can prove you didn't steal code outright, you are being incredibly naive. It's not that simple.
- jnbiche 11y ago
  > Your post indicates that you and your co-founder quit your jobs at Smule to start Shred. Are you insinuating that 2 employees quitting a company together and starting a company in the same "general space" is reasonable grounds for a lawsuit? > If you believe that your defense will be successful because you can prove you didn't steal code outright, you are being incredibly naive. It's not that simple. And that's to the shame of our legal system, and to the detriment of our country's economy.
  - 7Figures2Commas 11y ago
    > Are you insinuating that 2 employees quitting a company together and starting a company in the same "general space" is reasonable grounds for a lawsuit? If a former employer has reason to believe that the employees misappropriated intellectual property or otherwise violated the terms of their employment agreements in doing so, it has every right to seek to enforce its agreements and protect its interests. Like it or not, when employees leave to start a company in the same general space, claims of misappropriation are more likely. > And that's to the shame of our legal system, and to the detriment of our country's economy. How? If a source code comparison will not be dispositive of Smule's claims against Shred's co-founders, why would a court rely on a source code comparison? From what I can see, nobody has produced the actual filings in this case, so we don't know the exact claims, but other comments indicate that Smule isn't just claiming Shred's co-founders stole source code.
- mikeshreds 11y ago
  In our case, we did not develop anything Shred-related (ideas or otherwise) while we were employed at Smule. So invention assignment is not at issue, because we did not moonlight on Shred Video while employed by Smule. I knew I wanted to build products for the GoPro audience, which is why I left Smule. Mark left for his own different reasons, and we only began prototyping on things that turned into Shred Video after he left Smule.
  - 7Figures2Commas 11y ago
    > In our case, we did not develop anything Shred-related (ideas or otherwise) while we were employed at Smule. So invention assignment is not at issue, because we did not moonlight on Shred Video while employed by Smule. Please recognize that assignment is likely an issue because Smule will almost certainly try to claim the opposite of what you're claiming. It doesn't mean that they will be able to prove their claims, but you should at least be aware of the fact that there are two sides to every legal dispute and both parties have the opportunity to make their case. If this isn't matter isn't settled, the legal process provides the means to sort it all out and you'll have the opportunity to evaluate the evidence supporting Smule's claims as part of the discovery process.