Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

simulavr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 478 posts

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#51

Post by georgewsinger »

cableshaft wrote: post #40

>We're don't view ourselves in competition with Meta >...Meta sells reasonably good gaming headsets to customers who want to be entertained in VR; we're selling general-purpose productivity devices which are aimed at replacing PCs and laptops. Hate to break it to you, but if you don't think that Mark Zuckerberg is actively trying to create VR devices that are general-purpose productivity devices aimed at replacing PC…

We understand Meta sometimes future projects that their devices will have broad office applications, but we're skeptical it has any teeth.

Consider that Atari tried to compete with office PCs in the early 80s with their 8-bit family, and failed: https://images.fastcompany.net/image/upload/w_596,c_limit,q_...

It's hard to focus on multiple things at once, and we're skeptical that the bureaucratic forces in play at a large company like Meta will allow them to do a good job at making their gaming platform also one that people actually want to work in.

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#52

Post by ohgodplsno »

Entinel wrote: post #28

These types of things are incredibly silly. During the Epic vs Apple charade, Apple subpoenaed Steam for financial records as well which the judge forced Steam to comply with. The fact that a situation completely unrelated to me can force me to hand over what I would consider business secrets is a bit absurd.

Exposing those "business secrets" still has value, even to the general public. However, Apple should also have been forced to reveal their financial records.

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#53

Post by piggybox »

madamelic wrote: post #31
kodah wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's explained in the post. The FTC accused them of being anti-competitive. The only way to show you're not anti-competitive is to demand documents of your opponents that demonstrate you still have competition.

Seems like a "I'll know when I see it" situation. In that, if the FTC thinks they are anti-competitive, they probably are and at least should be blocked from acquiring their competition. Breaking them up or taking actual action against them would require deeper investigation with FTC taking the lead rather than potentially handing sensitive documents over to the offending company. If the company wants to fight the bl…

By the same logic: if FTC thinks net neutrality is bad, it probably is...

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#54

Post by mekkkkkk »

TakeBlaster16 wrote: post #24
georgewsinger wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to clarify: we're seeking legal counsel and intend to comply with the law. Many other larger companies have fought these subpoenas (Snap, etc) and, as far as we can tell, still had to hand over items.

If that's true, it sounds like companies have been weaponizing the legal system to get access to proprietary information from their competitors. Surely that has got to be illegal somehow?

The court decides whether a subpoena should be upheld or not. If the judge has signed off on this one, then it's all legit. Failing to comply would be contempt of court.

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#55

Post by unnouinceput »

dsign wrote: post #27

This is not Meta demanding to see some privilege information that exists in Simula's drawers, but rather commandeering the entire competing organization to do market research for Meta. It is clever and evil, and nothing anybody says after this will make me think that Meta is not anti-competitive nor that they have an once of ethics. As a consumer, I doubt I will ever again consider their VR products; I rather give my…

> I rather give my money to Satan, or even GoogleI giggled. When you go from "don't be evil" to this, you know you fucked up big time. This has to be the tagline of the decade in regards to Google ("Google!, the boss of Satan", hi hi hi).

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#56

Post by cldellow »

JeezusJuiceTPR wrote: post #39
dsign wrote: post #27

This is not Meta demanding to see some privilege information that exists in Simula's drawers, but rather commandeering the entire competing organization to do market research for Meta. It is clever and evil, and nothing anybody says after this will make me think that Meta is not anti-competitive nor that they have an once of ethics. As a consumer, I doubt I will ever again consider their VR products; I rather give my…

I don’t really know the rules of evidence, but I don’t think this is coming directly from Meta, nor that they’re allowed to review these documents themselves. The subpoena has to come from the court, and so I imagine it’s the court reviewing the documents, not Meta. I sure hope that’s how it works. I’d love for a lawyer to chime in, though.

? It is literally coming from Meta. That's what the subpoena and court filings that are screenshotted on that page show. Meta sought the subpoena, the court granted it, and now Simula has to testify at a deposition where the questions will be asked by Meta.

And... it sort of has to work this way? It's not the job of the court to do Meta or FTC's advocacy for them.

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#57

Post by bombcar »

dugmartin wrote: post #35
bombcar wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who pays for all the costs associated with this? Can you abuse the legal system to drive a company into bankruptcy by repeatedly subpoenaing them?

There are anti-SLAPP laws but those are for more for protecting freedom of speech: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_lawsuit_against_publ... but you can be labeled a "vexatious litigant" which causes you to be radioactive for representation (nobody wants to disbarred): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vexatious_litigation (IANAL but I enjoy watching them on TV)

From what I understand vexatious litigant is a really, really high bar to cross, and any remotely competent lawyer should be able to prevent you from crossing it.
Post reply on HN