3 ms·
read more closely. The company is suing, not the other way around. The outsider is refusing to settle, so the company and founder took the logical and necessary
by mark212 11y ago
read more closely. The company is suing, not the other way around. The outsider is refusing to settle, so the company and founder took the logical and necessary step of bring a lawsuit for declaratory relief. On the facts as presented, the only bully would be intransigent pseudo-founder who worked with the real founder for six weeks more than two years ago, well before any funding rounds or even seed investment.
- oxryly1 11y agoThe specific bully move is sama going public.
- nailer 11y agoCalling out shitty behaviour isn't a bully move.
- shawn-butler 11y agoYes it is. It is a case of (improperly?) using a position of some authority / popularity to force someone to change their behavior that he doesn't like. We have courts for a reason. This is bullying and shaming and most likely a distortion of fact in which he has, I assume, a not insubstantial financial interest. It is very bad form.
- refurb 11y agoI'm guessing if this case ever goes to trial, Sam is going to regret writing the blog post since he'll have to explain exactly what he meant by "Jeremy Guillory collaborated with Kyle" and "well before the company had achieved much of anything".
- nailer 11y agoUsing a position of authority to compel someone to change their behaviour is bad? There is no force involved. We don't know about any distortion of fact. If that facts are true the person doing this should be ashamed.
- bobbyi_settv 11y ago> If that facts are true the person doing this should be ashamed. Sure, but we don't know whether they are true, so we can him the benefit of the doubt. Sam Altman's behavior here is shameful in any case.
- nailer 11y agoYou're right, we don't know which side is true. If Sam is lying, his behaviour is shameful. But we don't know that either.