downandout

1674 ms·

3211.
by downandout 15y ago
I think an argument can be made that domains do require special protection. Web-based businesses are living, breathing entities that are permanently damaged when offline. Simply look at the before/after traffic statistics of the few sites
3212.
by downandout 15y ago
By the time these seizures occur, they have already collected all of the evidence they can from their public website, and there is nothing that would preclude the government from serving search warrants prior to serving notice of a domain s
3213.
by downandout 15y ago
This is perhaps the most naive statement I have ever read on Hacker News. Domain seizures don't have temporary consequences, and law enforcement knows this. Once they've seized the domain, they've done all the damage they need to do. Eve
3214.
by downandout 15y ago
I absolutely agree. This article is an awkward attempt by the author to take a subject which he is clearly opinionated about, and somehow tie the story-du-jour to it in order to draw attention. The two had nothing to do with each other, an
3215.
MegaUpload Founder Denied Bail(nzherald.co.nz)
1 points by downandout 15y ago|0 comments
3216.
by downandout 15y ago
Hopefully there will not be a trial. In order for a trial to occur, they have to be extradited. Nearly all extradition treaties require that the alleged conduct also constitute a crime under the laws of the jurisdiction that is being aske
3217.
by downandout 15y ago
Does it disturb anyone else that the government is basically using the threat of very questionable prosecutions to scare people that were at least purportedly adhering to US law into essentially shuttering their businesses? I've read the M
3218.
by downandout 15y ago
My reading of this indictment leads me to believe the you could replace "Mega Conspiracy" with "Youtube Conspiracy". Youtube profits from, and is well aware, that there are copyrighted videos on the system. A "reasonable person" would be
3219.
by downandout 15y ago
In my opinion, this is really the heart of the matter. It doesn't just give power to the executive branch. If you create and pass a law that potentially makes a significant percentage of the population into criminals, you have a bargainin
3220.
by downandout 15y ago
I'd much rather be offered products and services that are relevant to whatever I happened to be looking for at the time, than someone begging me for change indiscriminately. As to your point about clicking the X, you'd be amazed at the num
3221.
by downandout 15y ago
:)
3222.
by downandout 15y ago
Perhaps they should have a popup when you first visit that would give users the option. It would set a cookie with their selection. You have a choice between seeing some highly targeted text ads off to the side of articles, or you can see
3223.
by downandout 15y ago
I'm not saying that PayPal's account-limiting decisions are always irrational or entirely arbitrary. I am saying that in many cases, where there is no obvious cause, these decisions are based upon criteria largely out of control of the mer
3224.
by downandout 15y ago
Apparently you've never been on the receiving end of PayPal's unending wrath. It isn't pretty when it occurs. If you haven't experienced it, you won't believe that there is even a possibility that they would do it to a legitimate business
3225.
by downandout 15y ago
I would say there is a 99% chance that the moment he requests to have the money transferred to his bank account, his PayPal account will be limited. In the screenshot it shows that there are already 43 disputes. While this is a small perc
3226.
by downandout 15y ago
There was no vesting schedule. It was an ownership grant.
3227.
by downandout 15y ago
I agree that he deserves credit for building it into a real business, and he has been richly rewarded for that. However, everything - the company's name, its business model, and much of its intellectual property were my contributions. A
3228.
by downandout 15y ago
You are probably correct that there has been some dilution. My co-founder already had very deep pockets before we started the company, and I believe that he remained the primary investor throughout (though I am aware of 1 small round parti
3229.
by downandout 15y ago
I am in Nevada, but any litigation would likely take place in California. The company was initially based in Nevada, but was moved to San Diego (the Southern District of California for a federal matter). After the acquisition I believe th
3230.
by downandout 15y ago
Well, there were several corporate machinations. Initially, the company was an LLC, and I was given a 20% interest in it in writing. At some point after I left, during one of the financing rounds, it became a corporation. The corporation
3231.
by downandout 15y ago
I honestly wasn't asking anyone to fund anything. I am just seeking advice as to what I should do. I could have them prosecuted free of charge, but I'm not sure that will advance my cause.
3232.
by downandout 15y ago
I do have documentation regarding the 20%. The one attorney I have spoken to says, for reasons I still don't entirely understand, that I have a better shot at trying to sue them for using my intellectual property without permission, since
3233.
Ask HN: Screwed out of $12.8 million. Being Extorted. No Money for attorneys.
221 points by downandout 15y ago|105 comments