CrowdStrike offers a $10 apology gift card to say sorry for outage

Post by creer » Wed, Jul 24, 2024, 5:53 PM UTC

creer wrote: post #71

frognumber wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's what I suspect happened: Any contract requires consideration. Without it, it's not a valid contract. It doesn't require fair consideration, so a clause giving e.g. $1 is typical for many contracts. They were nice and bumped it up to $20. I suspect your work DID belong to the company already, under work-for-hire doctrine, but an explicit contract avoids that ambiguity. Ambiguity can be bad and super-expensive,…

Watch out for "work-for-hire doctrine" erm... assumptions. Last time I looked work-for-hire law only takes effect if there is explicit mention of the term "work-for-hire" in the contract, otherwise it's not "work-for-hire". And I have never seen a contract actually mention "work-for-hire". Do current employment contracts state "work-for-hire"?

Post by buggeryorkshire » Wed, Jul 24, 2024, 6:08 PM UTC

CyberDildonics wrote: post #92

indigodaddy wrote: post #2

‘ On Wednesday, some of the people who posted about the gift card said that when they went to redeem the offer, they got an error message saying the voucher had been canceled. When TechCrunch checked the voucher, the Uber Eats page provided an error message that said the gift card “has been canceled by the issuing party and is no longer valid.”’

Crowdstrike updated the card with a null value.

Post by WrongAssumption » Wed, Jul 24, 2024, 6:19 PM UTC

sophacles wrote: post #90

legitster wrote: post #63

I think the closest level of Brand disaster in our times would be the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. In that case, BP basically threw away their consumer brand in the US - they turned every single BP station into an Arco station (their subsidiary, "lower quality" brand at the time). Then they sold off or spun down a huge portion of their businesses to set aside money for legal fees. I don't know if Crowdstrike really h…

> The amount of legal liability the company is going to be under will be staggering and the brand reputation is worse than worthless. Citation for legal liability Crowdstrike has? Re reputation - I've read this about all sorts of annoyances that had real economic impact, i doubt this will make crowdstrike worthless any more than: * MS became worthless after Code Red or Slammer or any of the other late 90s/early 2000s…

Post by grouchomarx » Wed, Jul 24, 2024, 6:23 PM UTC

redleggedfrog wrote: post #17

Huh, so, not only clueless at security, but also clueless at customer relations. Also, their commercials are stupid, so clueless at marketing. I find it funny that their name, CrowdStrike, sounds like an anti-personnel reaper drone. Now metaphorically fits.

Post by evanelias » Wed, Jul 24, 2024, 6:31 PM UTC

legitster wrote: post #72

AdmiralAsshat wrote: post #13

This reminds me of the family who was awarded $4 in damages for a wrongful death suit. [0] It's almost worse than nothing. [0] https://hotair.com/jazz-shaw/2018/06/01/jury-awards-family-f...

It was later reduced to 4 cents, and later overturned. https://www.tcpalm.com/story/news/local/st-lucie-county/2022... All involved very split juries - so I think the low amount was kind of a compromise by the jury in each case.