If you're reading this - you need to ensure you read the response from WhosHere: https://whoshere.zendesk.com/entries/21514943-the-other-side...
A VC-funded startup called WhosHere is trying to steal my social network
191–200 of 228 posts
Re: A VC-funded startup called WhosHere is trying to steal my social network
#192Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks for the clarification on "ad hominem" versus personal attacks. Now I understand that it's only ad hominem if the basis of the argument relies on the personal attack. All that aside, your comment above, reproduced here, is clearly a personal attack: > Not only are you surprisingly easily manipulated, apparently, don't you have better things to hack on?
Is it "clearly" a personal attack even though there is a question mark there?
Yes. Try the following: "You are a moron who has no idea what they are talking about?", or an actual question "Are you a moron who has no idea what they are talking about?"
Both lower the tone. Both cause unnecessary battles and derail discussions.
Re: A VC-funded startup called WhosHere is trying to steal my social network
#193He mentions Lightbank is the vc, is it fair to judge them for this behavior? As an entrepreneur it does really put me off.
Based on corroborating evidence from people I know who have interacted with Lightbank, I would say yes.
They are the Groupon mafia, which should set some alarm bells off to begin with given Groupon's shady behavior toward investors (fudging numbers, cashing out most of their billion dollar round to shareholders, etc). I've heard stories self-indulgent term negotiation, deceptive terms, and dragging their feet before scuttling deals.
So in other words, dirty tricks sound right up their alley.
YMMV...
Re: A VC-funded startup called WhosHere is trying to steal my social network
#194Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The idea that only lawyers can know anything > about the law, and therefore nobody else can > suggest avenues of investigation is shockingly > elitist. My personal experience is that disclaimers such as you gave have very little legal standing, and that what you said can be regarded as legal advice, regardless of the "if"s, "but"s, "possibly"s, and "maybe"s that you so carefully sprinkled throughout. You certainly…
Disclaimers have legal effect. If you include a disclaimer that you are not providing legal advice, and that your discussion is limited solely to specific issues (and may not include all issues raised by the fact pattern at hand), you will not be liable. That does not mean you cannot be sued; anyone can be sued. But it does mean that you would win any lawsuit against. I am a lawyer. (In my particular field, the magic…
I too am a lawyer and while I agree that disclaimers have legal effect, I disagree that including a disclaimer necessarily relieves one of liability. In my jurisdiction, what is more critical is whether the recipient of the information believes it to be legal advice and whether the giver of information should realize the recipient may so believe.
Re: A VC-funded startup called WhosHere is trying to steal my social network
#195Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You are aware that there is legal liability for YOU being created as we speak, right? You keep asserting this repeatedly without citation (and are now doing so in a separate HN post you made on the issue). Kindly cite cases where damages have been successfully litigated around someone posting friendly advice in a web forum.
I have mentioned several times that I have firsthand involvement with unsolicited advice being given on the Internet resulting in consequences for people. I am simply not legally permitted to talk about it, nor will I say if I was the person found legally responsible. Remember, a liability does not require a law, and there are such things as torts.
[deleted]
Re: A VC-funded startup called WhosHere is trying to steal my social network
#196Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Not all legal liabilities arise from crimes.
Could you possibly be any more vague, prescriptive or unhelpful? Repeating yourself and ignoring pleas for elaboration helps no one.
Re: A VC-funded startup called WhosHere is trying to steal my social network
#197I 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 appreciate what you're doing, but you just wrote an essay full of legal advice, including conclusions on how the proceedings will go -- something you really shouldn't predict. By putting the words "this isn't legal advice" before your comment, you aren't magically making it okay to give your opinion in the guise of advice. Just be aware of that.
Note: IANAL
Is there any problem with giving legal advice? I thought that anyone can give legal advice, as long as they don't practice law (without authorization).
I guess the real question is, does legal advise always constitute the practice of law? I can go to an accountant, real estate agent, government department, police station, bank, or school and get something which technically constitutes legal advice.
I think it's a gray area, and I think the laws are a little vague (and vary with state law).
I'm pretty sure an offer "Ask me legal questions, even though I'm not a lawyer" would put you in hot water. I doubt you could create a forum specifically for non-lawyers to offer people advice.
I think there is a line somewhere between coincidental legal advice, and practicing law, and while I don't think anyone (even a lawyer) knows where that line is, I've never heard of a poster on an internet forum getting charged.
Re: A VC-funded startup called WhosHere is trying to steal my social network
#198I am a lawyer, and I have, in my own startup, contended with a company attempting to sue me/my startup for allegedly infringing on their trademark. I'm sympathetic to your cause, but playing with intellectual property issues is serious stuff and the reality of the situation is that better-funded players will not infrequently attempt to bully you into getting what they want, as appears to have occurred here. Obviously…
Good post though I will say even without the power of hindsight consulting a lawyer should've been step one. There's enough big trademark cases to go around in the public eye to know that these things shouldn't be taken lightly.
Re: A VC-funded startup called WhosHere is trying to steal my social network
#199The adage "An attorney who represents himself has a fool for a client" has some relevance, but in the information society self represeration can have major advantages. The best way to be a Pro Se is to hire outside counsel to advise you, but to do all the dirty litigation work yourself. If this company has hired an outside attorney to litigate, this person could make that a very, very expensive proposition for them.…
> 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…
Perhaps you should read my advice to the OP a second time, which clearly says "My advice is hire counsel to advise you, educate yourself...". In what bizarre lawyer-universe is telling someone to hire counsel and educate themselves on the Internet practicing law? You must be smoking crack, my friend, and a lot of it.
Re: A VC-funded startup called WhosHere is trying to steal my social network
#200Earlier quoted context omitted.
oh Mr. Very Important and his "this should be the only piece of advice in this thread." A few days ago there was this post #1 on YC News about a guys whose kid had this super-rare genetic disorder. Now, what, this guy should only listen to the Doctors and forget about turning on his own brain? I think that a good lawyer will listen to his Client and appreciate the Client who is interested enough in his case to propos…
That child's doctors personally examined the child, have expertise to deal with the situation, and are aware of any details which are important. A HN commenter has not personally met either party, in most cases is not a lawyer so he does not have expertise to deal with the situation, and most importantly, are only aware of what one party has told them. There is a significant difference.
You should take a look at an exchange between that guy and a guy with the bio: "Software development, web design ; interested in movies, animation and humor." [1]
Should they both just shut up and let the big boys handle it? Or should he take another person's input and use his head to determine it's value? People are capable of offering valuable input without expertise and full details.
As PG said, "Don't trust stuff you read on forums." He didn't say ignore it. It might even save his son's life. I'm strongly inclined to believe this can work in law as it can work with extremely rare medical conditions.