4 ms·
I mean, Orrick's name is generally enough for me. They're our lawyers, and talking with any of their partners is like talking with the best engineer you've ever
by estsauver 8y ago
I mean, Orrick's name is generally enough for me. They're our lawyers, and talking with any of their partners is like talking with the best engineer you've ever worked with. They just pull apart whatever they're working with.
I mean, who knows, but their reputation is worth so much more than a privacy policy that it's actually enough for me.
- nihonde 8y agoAs a former BigLaw lawyer, I find this attitude very misguided and mildly depressing. I’ve worked with good lawyers and bad at firms with big brand names. As firms consolidate further into thousands of lawyers under one name, the variable quality of their advice only increases. Anyway, even a junior attorney should know that answering the question “what will we do with your data?” is table stakes for putting a form online, especially one that is soliciting your private business information. (Edited to clarify that even where privacy policy is not required, you still should tell people what you’re going to do with their submissions.)
- rayshan 8y agoThanks, we like Orrick too! They're very founder-friendly. Talking about engineering, see my other comment about how no IPO readiness assessment input data is sent to our servers.