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

271–280 of 478 posts

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#271

Post by moomin »

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…

It’s definitely a heel move. I also fail to see how a small unprofitable firm (like most startups) is evidence of competition.

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#272

Post by treis »

jdgoesmarching wrote: post #111
colejohnson66 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If one is accused of antitrust practices (as Meta is by the FTC), your defense is to show that there's actually competition. It's not that Meta that wants the documents for corporate espionage (or whatever), but that they want to prove that SimulaVR is competing just fine in the market that contains Meta. This is explained in the article, which many here clearly didn't read past the headline. This is roughly the same…

Yeah, and we’re reacting to how crazy it is that Meta’s competitors are required to divulge internal documents to Meta so Meta can make a case that they aren’t anticompetitive. > It's not that Meta that wants the documents for corporate espionage Yes I’m sure we all trust Meta will behave ethically when given private information.

They're not required to divulge documents. They're required to respond to the subpoena. An acceptable response is that you don't want to divulge because they're confidential or the request is too burdensome.

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#273

Post by arrosenberg »

Bloedcoin wrote: post #258
arrosenberg wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can you determine it is cheap when Google is anticompetitively subsidizing the cost with advertising and data collection? You could be getting hosed and never know it.

Because android itself is free but I'm not seeing a lot of companies or you taking the time and effort to make an ad free Android phone for the same price or cheaper.

A competitor can’t enter the market to compete on price because Google subsidizes their product with ads. Thats the very picture of predatory, anticompetitive behavior. You can’t know what the market would be if Android were forced to compete fairly.

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#274

Post by vineyardmike »

kanetw wrote: post #84
cableshaft wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And there are plenty of instances of companies that have gone under when a big parent company decides to incorporate your business as a 'feature' in part of their big monster product. I'm not saying it's going to definitely happen and the company is doomed or anything, it's certainly possible that SimulaVR will come out on top for productivity devices (or peacefully coexist as an alternative alongside Meta's offering…

Of course anything Meta does is a bit worrisome. I just don't think we're in the same niche-- IMO Meta is fundamentally built on data collection, and VR is just a side effect. Unless Meta decides to abandon that, I think we'll have a niche.

> IMO Meta is fundamentally built on data collection

Isn’t their whole Metaverse thing a gamble to get away from that? Why does data collection prevent creating a good VR experience. If anything it should align goals well (spend as much time in VR as possible, so as much in VR as possible). Besides, most DataCollection companies offer CollectionFree enterprise contracts… which is where the money for this probably is.

(Btw I’m a huge fan of this sort of product and I hope a respectful company wins.. I’m just skeptical that meta can’t fund their way to success. )

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#275

Post by tarakat »

tannhauser23 wrote: post #232
kanetw wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We aren't throwing a hissy fit lol. We're just stating the facts and are working with our lawyers to resolve this.

You made a site complaining about the subpoena and came to Hacker News to complain about it some more. Look, I get that you guys are a small shop but you should not be surprised to be asked to provide evidence in an antitrust litigation over the VR market. I'm guessing you haven't seen a subpoena before - they are all like this, and your attorneys will be able to negotiate something much less burdensome. So get off H…

> You made a site complaining about the subpoena [..] I'm guessing you haven't seen a subpoena before - they are all like this

If everyone kept their mouths shut as you suggest, we wouldn't know about how rotten the legal system is until it was our turn at the gallows.

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#276

Post by sroussey »

Huh1337 wrote: post #196
tannhauser23 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This shows that SimulaVR is run by a bunch of children. Every subpoena says this, but you work with the attorneys to figure out the time and manner that works best for the deposition. I routinely flew thousands of miles to do depositions in places that worked best for the deposed. And complaining about how the subpoena's asking for tons of documents. Again, every subpoena does this; you have to negotiate with the att…

So what if they don't have the funds? What if they have only so much for this but then have to close the business down because of it? It's a small startup.

You charge them time and materials, and cap it. Or ignore it. Best to just write back that they are too small, no revenue, no funding.

Ignore the tone of these things. Legal is commanded to write in this manner.

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#277

Post by TedDoesntTalk »

M4v3R wrote: post #124
TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a subpoena from a legal team, NOT a court. You are free to write “we don’t know” for much of the questions or even write “too burdensome to answer”. Such subpoenas have little teeth. Hire a lawyer for a few hours to confirm what I say since I’m some random internet guy.

From the article: We've also been commanded to drop everything we're doing and go tesify on these matters _in person_, thousands of miles away from us, by the stated deadline :| So it's not just a matter of writing "we don't know". They have to produce a lot of material and then travel 1000's of miles to show up in the court in person.

You’re missing the point. The source of the subpoena is important. Subpoenas from lawyers are not something you have to answer completely. They have no teeth. They are not from a court of law.

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#278

Post by bobse »

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…

It's easy. Never give money to Americans.

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#280

Post by ivraatiems »

This blog post doesn't explain what they are actually going to do about this. It's just a (non-legal) complaint about the fact they got a subpoena, which is honestly a pretty normal and uncontroversial thing. It might be bad for Meta to request this info, but if so, the right thing to do is get a lawyer, submit a motion to quash, and then go after Meta for costs through legal process.

What is SimulaVR actually going to do to respond to this? Do they intend to respond? Who's representing them? I can't imagine a lawyer recommended writing this blog post.

The "we can't afford this" argument doesn't hold water. Lawyers are expensive but this is not a complicated thing SimulaVR is being asked to do, and they're likely to get their costs back from the court if they ask.

Post reply on HN