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

An Open Letter to Warby Parker

classicspecs.tumblr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 76 posts

Re: An Open Letter to Warby Parker

#51

Post by victork2 »

dkrich wrote: post #26

Until Classic Specs gets a prominently-featured set of advertisements with a faux-intellectual, salt-and-pepper haired douchebag, Warby Parker can't cry foul. I know this is going to get down-voted, but seriously, it is 2012. Who buys a monocle? I want to buy one and wear it around as a joke.

I agree, I went to their main page, immediately had a hipster overload that made me close the page.

As for the open letter, thanks for sharing the dirty laundry, that's awesome! Just kidding, I don't really see the point of sharing that publicly except for gathering some pity buys.

Re: An Open Letter to Warby Parker

#52

Post by DanBC »

dkrich wrote: post #26

Until Classic Specs gets a prominently-featured set of advertisements with a faux-intellectual, salt-and-pepper haired douchebag, Warby Parker can't cry foul. I know this is going to get down-voted, but seriously, it is 2012. Who buys a monocle? I want to buy one and wear it around as a joke.

> Who buys a monocle?

Someone with only one eye?

EDIT TO ADD: [. . .] and with facial disfigurement / prosthesis that makes wearing glasses uncomfortable or difficult.

Re: An Open Letter to Warby Parker

#54

Post by smackfu »

tomkarlo wrote: post #48
abyssknight wrote: post #3

Why do startups do this? I've seen this a few times over the past few years, and every time I find it loathsome. Dirty laundry isn't something you just go around airing because someone sent you a C&D letter. It could have been a mistake, it could have been a rogue legal team member, it could have been anything. Does it matter to the general public? No. Should it? No. This is between two businesses, and should have st…

If it's a mistake, or a rogue team member, the onus is on WP to correct the letter. Aside from verifying that the letter did indeed come from someone authorized to speak on behalf of WP, it's fair for the recipient to assume that the letter is "as authorized" by the sender. If someone like WP or another company is going to send a letter like this, they should operate on the assumption that it will be made public (esp…

Note that the C&D is from 16 months ago.

Re: An Open Letter to Warby Parker

#55

Post by rokhayakebe »

DanBC wrote: post #52
dkrich wrote: post #26

Until Classic Specs gets a prominently-featured set of advertisements with a faux-intellectual, salt-and-pepper haired douchebag, Warby Parker can't cry foul. I know this is going to get down-voted, but seriously, it is 2012. Who buys a monocle? I want to buy one and wear it around as a joke.

> Who buys a monocle? Someone with only one eye? EDIT TO ADD: [. . .] and with facial disfigurement / prosthesis that makes wearing glasses uncomfortable or difficult.

But you have to admit that is not who they are targeting because they are using a fully-figured person to show the glass.

Re: An Open Letter to Warby Parker

#56

Post by rokhayakebe »

ggchappell wrote: post #29

To me, one paragraph in this post stands out far above the others in importance. I find it interesting that it is getting so few comments here. It is the "P.S.". If one business sends a C&D to another, then they can't expect it to be kept private. You can argue about the wisdom of posting it, or what this says about the poster's attitude; however, Classic Specs is certainly within both legal and ethical standards in…

That may have been messed up, but I admit I got a laugh out of it.

Re: An Open Letter to Warby Parker

#57

Post by dr_ »

An open letter to warby parker & classicspecs:

there are a lot of us out there who don't wear "hipster"ish eyeglasses that pretty much all look the same. please offer more variety.

thanks.

Re: An Open Letter to Warby Parker

#58

Post by eridius »

abyssknight wrote: post #3

Why do startups do this? I've seen this a few times over the past few years, and every time I find it loathsome. Dirty laundry isn't something you just go around airing because someone sent you a C&D letter. It could have been a mistake, it could have been a rogue legal team member, it could have been anything. Does it matter to the general public? No. Should it? No. This is between two businesses, and should have st…

I got the impression this open letter wasn't in response to the C&D (that was a while ago), but due to the fact that WP is apparently trying to sabotage Classic Specs's business prospects, e.g. by talking to CS's potential investors and saying unsavory things about CS. CS could run around trying to reassure their potential investors, or they could try and turn this into a marketing opportunity. Looks like they've gone with the latter.

Re: An Open Letter to Warby Parker

#59

Post by tylerritchie »

dfc wrote: post #46
mokus wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Copyright is given de facto, but" ... If you're going to imply someone isn't reading what they wrote, the least you can do is read what they wrote.

True. I apologize for coming off like a jerk. I should have provided more context, i was trying to highlight that contrary to what the OP wrote that is was irrelevant "they never show that the text was copyrighted."

I didn't disagree with the, "they never show that the text was copyrighted." But I did think it reasonable to point out that there is--in fact--a place to register your works for a registered copyright. You don't have to, but it does give you nice benefits.

Re: An Open Letter to Warby Parker

#60

Post by mtrimpe »

Karunamon wrote: post #43
RockyMcNuts wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://www.chinapost.com.tw/taiwan/national/national-news/20... Ray Tsai (蔡瑞芳), one of Taiwan's pioneers in laser eye surgery, said yesterday that he will no longer perform the procedure because it violates his medical ethics. ... He has observed situations in which visual acuity worsens suddenly and rapidly long after the LASIK procedure itself.

>He has observed situations There are situations in which medical procedures fail, sometimes immediately, sometimes many years after the fact. That does not indicate a problem with the procedure.

Lasik's not all sunshine. I for example suffer from a fairly common and known complication, which is loss of contrast. That means that apart from being severely night-blind my vision becomes unpredictably blurry whenever lightning conditions change. I'm still counted as a success story but in retrospect I would trade my old impaired but stable vision for my improved but unstable vision.
Post reply on HN