4 ms·
> an agreement where Metalab is reimbursed for the entire amount of their initial quote. Why on earth would/should that happen over a few mockups? It's not th
by midnightmonster 17y ago
> an agreement where Metalab is reimbursed for the entire
amount of their initial quote.
Why on earth would/should that happen over a few mockups? It's not that Mozilla asked Metalab to do a bunch of work, claimed it sucked so they wouldn't pay, and then used it anyway. No: Moz decided not to hire Metalab, and someone ripped off some existing work of Metalab's for some mockups.
Now, I think that was an inexcusable thing to do on the part of whoever did it, but even if it was actual Mozilla staff, I just don't see why Mozilla ought to pay Metalab for not working nor hire them unless they happened to be the second choice. (Because the first choice--assuming they were responsible--has got to go.)
- taitems 17y agoBecause the person responsible (not knowing who that is just yet) directly stole their images, violated their copyright and their intellectual property. Instead of tying things up with lawyers, mediation and strongly worded letters, why not simply pay what was quoted for, and forget it ever happened?
- brandon272 17y agoWhen you talk about lawyers and strongly worded letters, are you talking about MetaLab suing Mozilla over copyright issues, or are you talking about Mozilla suing MetaLab for trying to damage their reputation? And what about Daniel? Doesn't he have a reasonable expectation to privacy? I'm assuming he didn't give MetaLab permission to post his private correspondence with them on their website.
- dasht 17y agoYes. (By which I mean that a settlement offer along the lines suggested is part of how to avoid the kind of tangle you describe.)