IANAL, advice: get one.
Also: To reiterate everyone else -- we'll happily contribute to help pay your ass-kicking fees. :)
A VC-funded startup called WhosHere is trying to steal my social network
91–100 of 228 posts
Re: A VC-funded startup called WhosHere is trying to steal my social network
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let me start by saying: OP should get a lawyer -- like yesterday -- if he cares about the future of his company. Now, moving on... > In this case, there are legal repercussions and serious consequences to doing most of things on this page. This is stuff to talk about with a lawyer, not the fucking Internet, and the person I replied to is already giving frighteningly bad advice. There are legal repercussions and serio…
My valuable knowledge is that this discussion shouldn't be happening, because I've seen firsthand what an Internet comment can do legally, both to plaintiff and defendant. So yes, I would prefer it be shot down. I am not legally permitted to discuss the cases in question nor provide specifics of my knowledge, nor will I create liability for myself by refuting specific legal advice being given in this thread.
In that case, might I suggest you end this thread now? Comments on HN should be submitted when they add value; if you're not willing to actually participate in a conversation and attempt to add value, I'd say that the comments have little to no place on the site. Especially in the other parts of the thread where you and another commenter got into it and it ended with "Fuck you."
Re: A VC-funded startup called WhosHere is trying to steal my social network
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
You've posted two negative comments thus far. Your point is valid that one must hear both sides. Are you affiliated with either party? Disclaimer: I'm a random HN reader who has done work in the area of location aware computing. I have no connection with either party.
It concerns me that I'm attacked personally for advocating for common sense when it comes to the law. Being sued? Shut up. Don't post to HN. Don't comment on the case. Don't challenge the other party to Quake 3 on Twitter. Don't give people legal advice after saying "I'm not a lawyer and this isn't legal advice". Stop being stupid. This advice transcends my allegiance, which is to nobody involved in this discussion (…
For someone who posts things like "Not only are you surprisingly easily manipulated, apparently, don't you have better things to hack on?", it takes a lot of temerity to act offended at personal attacks.
There's a difference between giving advice from a position of authority and exploring the subject from a variety of angles. It feels to me as though you're accusing folks doing the latter of engaging in the former. Playing around with an idea and throwing out possibilities--some of them foolish or ill-advised, certainly--is at the core of the hacker culture, and I'd like to discourage you from criticizing people for doing so, while still maintaining your healthy skepticism.
Re: A VC-funded startup called WhosHere is trying to steal my social network
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
> My advise is hire counsel to advise you, educate yourself of self representation and court procedures, and rake these fuckers over the coals. This is terrible advice. Unless you're a duly licensed attorney in OP's jurisdiction, don't offer legal advice. You're practicing law without a license, which is a crime. Moreover, were OP to rely on that advice to his detriment, you may find yourself named as a defendant in…
Can you find some documents under which circumstances this is a crime? I find that you should not do that for money or in court on wikipedia, but I somehow fail to find that "giving advice" or even "drafting legal documents" can be a crime.
https://www.google.com/search?q=unauthorized+practice+of+law
"[A]s the term is generally understood, the practice of the law is the doing and performing services in a court of justice in any matter depending therein through its various stages and in conformity with the adopted rules of procedure. But in a larger sense it includes legal advice and counsel and the preparation of legal instruments and contracts by which legal rights are secured although such matter may or may not be depending in a court of law." (People v. Merchants Protective Corp. (1922) 189 Cal. 31, 535, quoting Eley v. Miller (1893) 7 Ind. App. 529 [emphasis added]).
Re: A VC-funded startup called WhosHere is trying to steal my social network
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree with jsprinkles for the most part. There is a great deal of legal advice packed in there. The OP needs a lawyer. But on the other hand, I have to agree with nirvana about one thing. A certain amount of work must necessarily fall on the OP to find the right lawyer for the case. As nirvana says, there will be plenty of lawyers who aren't really interested and just say "roll over," while there will be others who…
You don't have to do any work to find a lawyer beyond calling your county bar association's lawyer referral service (or the ABA lawyer referral service). Lawyers are obligated to turn down cases on which they would be unable to provide competent representation. They will ask you for information, you will provide it, and they will determine whether they can competently provide representation. Trust them.
But surely you're not suggesting that all lawyers are equally effective, have the same style (level of aggressiveness, etc.), or would have the same opinion about a given case?
I can say with certainty, from firsthand experience, that none of these three things is true. I've also seen lawyers replaced because their performance was inadequate.
Given that, how could one possibly avoid having to carefully and deliberately choose a lawyer?
Re: A VC-funded startup called WhosHere is trying to steal my social network
#96I never went to law school so there's no way I could be a lawyer, I'm just giving my thoughts on things I would do in this situation. This isn't legal advice. I sympathize with your situation and I'm sure there are a couple lessons learned here- namely that they used negotiation with email to apparently cause you to forget that there was court case pending. But saying that doesn't help you. I've been in the situation…
I just want to say thanks for writing such a detailed comment and that it provides value to our community. I hope it doesn't constitute legal advice, but I'm not convinced you can take the views of armchair lawyers that it does.
Re: A VC-funded startup called WhosHere is trying to steal my social network
#97Wow ... this is shocking! Can someone explain how this is even remotely trademark infringement? I'd also suggest you dig up research papers in conferences such as UbiComp and Pervasive. The "who is near me" app has been around for years. Also, check out papers on the cooltown project. I'm not totally sure what a defense to a trademark infringement claim would be. Perhaps if a researcher used the same name in a paper,…
My sense is that it is only "remotely" infringement.
Frankly, I think they like his name better than theirs and are trying to steal that. It's indeed a better name.
Re: A VC-funded startup called WhosHere is trying to steal my social network
#98WhosHere exist by about 5 years!
The word "who" and the implication of location is not enough to hang an infringement.
Re: A VC-funded startup called WhosHere is trying to steal my social network
#99Wikipedia says that WhosHere was founded in 2008 and launched their app in 2009: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WhosHere If that's the case and their app predates Who's Near Me, I have to say that the OP is probably going to lose this. The names and apps certainly do seem confusingly similar.
Who do you think is going to be confused by a compound two-word term, and a plain-English three word phrase that shares only one word, and that word is unclaimably common?
Re: A VC-funded startup called WhosHere is trying to steal my social network
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow. Let me respond point by point: > You have merely engaged in ad hominem That's the second time I've been accused of ad hominem attacks in this thread, and the second time it's been flatly wrong. An ad hominem is me refuting your point by implying that you personally are not qualified to give it . I am not refuting your point, at all, and I have been careful to do so except to generally label some of your advice b…
> Let me respond point by point: I wish you had. >An ad hominem is me refuting your point by implying that you personally are not qualified to give it. Your claim that I am not a lawyer and therefore shouldn't be giving legal advice is, by definition " implying that you personally are not qualified to give it. " Now add to that ad hominem the fact that I wasn't giving legal advice, and your repeated insistence that I…
You are intentionally being disingenuous, now, because you're upset. That's fairly transparent in your reply. Multiple people have told you that you are giving legal advice, and suggested that you stop, and pointed out how I am correct, and yet you're sticking to your guns that I'm a troll.
I can't even begin to attack the amount of stupid in this comment, so I'm cutting my losses, adding your name and company mentally to my personal blacklist for doing business or hiring, and getting out of the thread before this consumes even more of my time.