Live data from Hacker News

Fucking Sue Me

pud.com

41–50 of 152 posts

Re: Fucking Sue Me

#41
post #10

Ugh. At one extreme: giving your counsel veto power over what contracts you sign, and allowing them to bill time ping-ponging contracts until prospects give up. At the other extreme: just signing everything and saying "fucking sue me" when things go sideways. You should be somewhere in the middle. Contracts more often than not have provisions that are silly for you to accept verbatim. And, contracts more often than n…

Isn't the "one extreme to the other" kind of the point of his post? Following his gut has obviously worked quite well for him.

It's refreshing to hear this side. And frankly, it doesn't sound like you know much about him if you're replying about "being sensible."

Re: Fucking Sue Me

#42
post #31

> Then there was the time I wanted to hire my first full time employee. I was apprehensive to do it because I only had enough money to pay him for 2 months, unless I got another client fast. > “Worry about that in 2 months,” Dad said. Speaking from the perspective of that employee, fuck you . OK, for the serious point: you may be not give a shit about risk. Good for you, you crazy risk taker! The world truly needs mo…

Pretty much all employment is risky. It doesn't matter that you have a car payment and a wife going thru graduate school. Those are financial risks you took. Your employment could end at any time. The company could be seized by the government as part of some investigation and shut down, the CEO could be hit by a bus, you could screw up in a big way and get fired. You could be hit by a brain aneurism and simply not be…

Just because these things can theoretically happen at any company doesn't make them equally likely. Startups are far more likely to go bust or lay off people with little warning.

Re: Fucking Sue Me

#43
post #32
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being employee #1 is the worst of both worlds. You get the risk of a startup and you most likely will get very little payout if the startup is successful. Most of the people I know that were employee #1 got nothing.

That's reassuring. (putting in my two weeks notice tomorrow to be employee #1)

Make sure that you'd be happy if you worked long and hard for the start-up and all you got was the salary they're paying you + the experience.

Even if the start-up is a huge success, the chances of you making substantial amounts of money are low, unless you have founder-level equity.

Re: Fucking Sue Me

#44
post #32
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being employee #1 is the worst of both worlds. You get the risk of a startup and you most likely will get very little payout if the startup is successful. Most of the people I know that were employee #1 got nothing.

That's reassuring. (putting in my two weeks notice tomorrow to be employee #1)

Not to worry, they've just read the article on why you should not be the first employee in a startup, and more specifically, what terms you should not necessarily agree too.

Being the first employee of a startup can be the best thing since sliced bread. You take little risk (compared to the actual owners), yet the reward is usually way better than employee number 100. Who do you think is more likely to get 1) a bumb in pay and 2) a better position first?

Re: Fucking Sue Me

#45
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty much all employment is risky. It doesn't matter that you have a car payment and a wife going thru graduate school. Those are financial risks you took. Your employment could end at any time. The company could be seized by the government as part of some investigation and shut down, the CEO could be hit by a bus, you could screw up in a big way and get fired. You could be hit by a brain aneurism and simply not be…

The difference is that most of those things are risks you can't reasonably plan for. If you know that the start-up you're working for has x months of runway, then you can plan for looking for a new gig, ensure you have savings to carry you over, or decide to work elsewhere. But you can't plan for it if the company's owner hides it from you. If you think you need to lie to your staff about the company's finances, then…

I agree with you, but I'd like to point out that the article was expressing apprehension at hiring the guy (e.g.: he was concerned as to whether he'd be able to keep him employed for more than 2 months)... there's no indication that the financial state of the company was hidden from the employee.

At least in my experience, while I haven't known the exact financial state of startups I've worked for, I've generally known the level of risk I was signing up for.

Re: Fucking Sue Me

#46
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is that most of those things are risks you can't reasonably plan for. If you know that the start-up you're working for has x months of runway, then you can plan for looking for a new gig, ensure you have savings to carry you over, or decide to work elsewhere. But you can't plan for it if the company's owner hides it from you. If you think you need to lie to your staff about the company's finances, then…

I agree with you, but I'd like to point out that the article was expressing apprehension at hiring the guy (e.g.: he was concerned as to whether he'd be able to keep him employed for more than 2 months)... there's no indication that the financial state of the company was hidden from the employee. At least in my experience, while I haven't known the exact financial state of startups I've worked for, I've generally kno…

If you're completely up-front about the financials then there's no reason to be apprehensive, surely? After all, the employee is deciding their own level of risk then.

Re: Fucking Sue Me

#47
post #36
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nowadays a lot of companies try to add clauses that pierce the corporate veil (for example, having personal guarantees)

For all kinds of things, like leases and such were the company is too young to have any credit. But a personal guarantee on delivering a website on time would be a bit much.

For longer projects, you should be asking for some sort of upfront payment (to avoid being screwed over -- i learned that the hard way).

In that circumstance, companies may demand some sort of clawback if benchmarks aren't met.

Re: Fucking Sue Me

#48
The lesson here: it was 1998. "The industry" was still a little fledgling, so the legal territory was still largely unchartered. But it grew into an ugly duckling, quickly.

Sent the contract to my lawyer. She marked it up, sent it to the client. Then the client marked it up and sent it back to my lawyer. And so on, back and forth for almost a month.

Garbage in, garbage out. During the "ugly duckling" phase, the legal machine is just learning that it can spew garbage. It tests its limits. Just how much garbage can it spit before something happens? When the garbage is between private parties? Apparently, a lot.

I charged my first client $1,400. My second client paid $5,400. The next paid $24,000. I remember the exact amounts — they were the largest checks I’d seen up til that point.

Then I wrote a proposal for $340,000...

The Bust was just growing pains.

It probably could be reasonably argued that the industry is still in an ugly duckling phase (multi-Billion dollar valuations, really?)

But this is part of growing up.

In Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace Lessig writes:

It is a lack of a certain kind of regulation that produced the Y2K problem, not too much regulation. An overemphasis on the private got us here, not an overly statist federal government. Were the tort system better at holding producers responsible for the harms they create, code writers and their employers would have been more concerned with the harm their code would create. Were contract law not so eager to allow liability in economic transactions to be waived, the licenses that absolved the code writers of any potential liability from bad code would not have induced an even greater laxity in what these code writers were producing. And were the intellectual property system more concerned with capturing and preserving knowledge than with allowing private actors to capture and preserve profit, we might have had a copyright system that required the lodging of source code with the government before the protection of copyright was granted, thus creating an incentive to preserve source code and hence create a resource that does not now exist but that we might have turned to in undoing the consequences of this bad code. If in all these ways government had been different, the problems of Y2K would have been different as well.

[source: http://www.code-is-law.org/conclusion_excerpt.html]

This is dated (1999), but interesting. He was wrong about Y2K, of course, but not about the underlying issues and problems with contract law and IP.

Re: Fucking Sue Me

#49
post #32
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being employee #1 is the worst of both worlds. You get the risk of a startup and you most likely will get very little payout if the startup is successful. Most of the people I know that were employee #1 got nothing.

That's reassuring. (putting in my two weeks notice tomorrow to be employee #1)

I know it's probably the furthest thing from your mind right now, but I think it'd be really interesting to hear how this works out, say a year or two from now

Re: Fucking Sue Me

#50
If you are the small guy, then try to get YOUR document to be the starting point. Use YOUR law firm to write it. Go to a law firm and tell them to use something from a similar contract before.

If you expect there will be negotiations, basically try to use and re-use your standard document. You are going to be in this business for a while, hopefully. So you only have to pay for your standard document once. Plus you'll know the ins and outs of it better than anyone else.

I think the right solution these days is to insist on standard documents and focus on the amendments rather than getting something from scratch. There is a good list of documents to form startups, for example, here:

http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2010/03/standardized-venture-funding...

Similarly there are things at legalzoom and other places. I realize that sometimes the big company will insist on going with their standard contract, but if they were really that adamant, they wouldn't let you go back and forth with your lawyer too much. Just start with your own document or walk away if you don't want to take the risk.

Post reply on HN