4 ms·

Large fines like these, even if the facts are clear, do not support competition and seem anti-consumer and anti-innovation. Either the fines should be smaller o

Large fines like these, even if the facts are clear, do not support competition and seem anti-consumer and anti-innovation. Either the fines should be smaller or the laws changed to better balance what concretely happened: a poaching of a key employee that led to the development of a big product. That being said, Facebook doesn't really seem to have its R&D figured out. It's poisoned by bad leadership. Palmer Luckey managed to disgrace himself in public opinion in a way that seems hostile to recruiting the kind of progressive, free-thinking talent that makes up most R&D teams. John Carmack, besides his political leanings, speaks derisively of "Hollywood people" (Oculus users) and came out of this lawsuit looking like a real jerk chasing a huge check at any cost. At the end of the day, he betrayed a video game company. Mark Zuckerberg has a lot of leadership faults disguised behind an amateurish ownership structure that puts him outside of public accountability. Despite its huge head start, Oculus is seriously threatened by HTC, Sony, Google and Samsung. Paper and Facebook payments didn't really go anywhere. Though Instagram and WhatsApp seem to be good acquisitions, even at their extraordinary prices, a broken clock can still be right twice a day. And it doesn't really take leadership to spend huge amounts of money on acquisitions—that's the easy way out. Outside of Facebook, his New Jersey schools efforts were not well regarded. Will his $3 billion commitment to a SF Biohub be marred by similar issues? I'm just nervous is all. I think market sentiment will catch up with this ruling. Eventually someone's going to ask if he's the right guy to be in charge of Facebook. The public investor may never actually have the power to do something about it.

AmirS2 10y ago
> what concretely happened: a poaching of a key employee Not quite the reason for the fine according to TFA: > Instead, it ruled that Luckey, who was working as a contractor for Zenimax before starting the Kickstarter for the Oculus Rift headset, violated his non-disclosure agreement,
- doctorpangloss 10y ago
  In my personal opinion, whether or not Luckey violated the NDA is a little academic. Clearly, the $3 billion acquisition occurred on the reputation of John Carmack, who was poached. I don't think you should charge $500 million for a poaching. That's the crux of my anticompetitiveness argument. Nonetheless, you definitely shouldn't charge $500 million for merely violating an NDA, even if that's what the jury found.
- funnyfacts365 10y ago
  Offtopic but, why do people feel it's alright to refer to the article as The Fucking Article and on some other stuff they get all mad because someone used a curse word? The HN crowd is bipolar...
  - pzxc 10y ago
    TFA stands for The Featured Article and always has, though I can understand your misapprehension because of RTFM which does use F as you suggest.
    - jfoutz 10y ago
      But remember to use fine if anybody important asks.
    - gergoerdi 10y ago
      The "F" in RTFM stands for "First": http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/RTFM http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/RTFM
  - gpderetta 10y ago
    It is as if they are different people!
  - sundvor 10y ago
    TFA has long history, and the OP should be right to use it without anyone getting hurt.
  - funnyfacts365 10y ago
    Thank you all for the downvotes for asking a serious question that was really bugging me. I even bet the ones who downvoted didn't even took the time to answer. Cheers!
devwastaken 10y ago
Being hired to work on projects, using your companies time and money, and then taking that project to another company yourself, is stealing. Stealing is very anti-competative, and massively increases risk in investment. If anything, this case shows that you can steal a companies resources to make your own products, and if its a good idea then lawsuits are just a cost of doing business.
- TAForObvReasons 10y ago
  I don't know why you are being downvoted. When you are on company time or working on company resources, your output generally belongs to the company unless you have a special exemption. The cavalier attitude by many people in SV towards IP is somewhat tragic
- y_u_no_rust 10y ago
  I'm fully on the Zenimax side of this one as well.
RestlessMind 10y ago
> Large fines like these, even if the facts are clear, do not support competition and seem anti-consumer and anti-innovation. Supporting competition or being pro-consumer / pro-innovation should not come at the cost of individual property rights, which is one of the cornerstones of wealth creation. I can agree with curtailing property rights in some extreme cases (eg. antitrust litigations or eminent domain), but I don't see any reason to do so in the case of Zenimax.

AmirS2 10y ago

> what concretely happened: a poaching of a key employee Not quite the reason for the fine according to TFA: > Instead, it ruled that Luckey, who was working as a contractor for Zenimax before starting the Kickstarter for the Oculus Rift headset, violated his non-disclosure agreement,

doctorpangloss 10y ago
In my personal opinion, whether or not Luckey violated the NDA is a little academic. Clearly, the $3 billion acquisition occurred on the reputation of John Carmack, who was poached. I don't think you should charge $500 million for a poaching. That's the crux of my anticompetitiveness argument. Nonetheless, you definitely shouldn't charge $500 million for merely violating an NDA, even if that's what the jury found.
funnyfacts365 10y ago
Offtopic but, why do people feel it's alright to refer to the article as The Fucking Article and on some other stuff they get all mad because someone used a curse word? The HN crowd is bipolar...
- pzxc 10y ago
  TFA stands for The Featured Article and always has, though I can understand your misapprehension because of RTFM which does use F as you suggest.
  - jfoutz 10y ago
    But remember to use fine if anybody important asks.
  - gergoerdi 10y ago
    The "F" in RTFM stands for "First": http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/RTFM http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/RTFM
- gpderetta 10y ago
  It is as if they are different people!
- sundvor 10y ago
  TFA has long history, and the OP should be right to use it without anyone getting hurt.
- funnyfacts365 10y ago
  Thank you all for the downvotes for asking a serious question that was really bugging me. I even bet the ones who downvoted didn't even took the time to answer. Cheers!

devwastaken 10y ago

Being hired to work on projects, using your companies time and money, and then taking that project to another company yourself, is stealing. Stealing is very anti-competative, and massively increases risk in investment. If anything, this case shows that you can steal a companies resources to make your own products, and if its a good idea then lawsuits are just a cost of doing business.

TAForObvReasons 10y ago
I don't know why you are being downvoted. When you are on company time or working on company resources, your output generally belongs to the company unless you have a special exemption. The cavalier attitude by many people in SV towards IP is somewhat tragic
y_u_no_rust 10y ago
I'm fully on the Zenimax side of this one as well.

RestlessMind 10y ago

> Large fines like these, even if the facts are clear, do not support competition and seem anti-consumer and anti-innovation. Supporting competition or being pro-consumer / pro-innovation should not come at the cost of individual property rights, which is one of the cornerstones of wealth creation. I can agree with curtailing property rights in some extreme cases (eg. antitrust litigations or eminent domain), but I don't see any reason to do so in the case of Zenimax.