5 ms·
Yes, this is a very loaded, biased headline and implication. Seems oddly personal. If the assumption is that "Jack" will remain at BlueSky indefinitely, perhap
by hammyhavoc 4y ago
Yes, this is a very loaded, biased headline and implication. Seems oddly personal.
If the assumption is that "Jack" will remain at BlueSky indefinitely, perhaps looking at his history, and what the average founder does will show that's highly unlikely to be the case in the long-term.
Perhaps the headline should be updated with this in mind.
Even more surprising, the author is apparently a lawyer: https://threadreaderapp.com/user/ashleygjovik https://threadreaderapp.com/user/ashleygjovik
Whilst that explains picking apart the ToS, it seems odd to name "Jack".
- btown 4y agoGiven that https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/bluesky-514d/company_financials https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/bluesky-514d/company... shows him as the only investor, it's reasonable to assume he's by far the controlling (if not only) shareholder. I'm not a lawyer, but it's reasonable IMHO to think that unless/until Bluesky gets additional institutional capital that would frown on this, it could effectively name Jack as a "licensee" or "assign" - the words in the policy - at any time without needing to alert the public, and give him full IP rights to user data.
- wmf 4y agoJack isn't even "at" Bluesky today.
- jkombssukmmhf 4y ago[flagged]