91–100 of 180 posts
I'm one of the parties to this: I founded ActBlue back in Cambridge before coming to SF and building Meteor. The funny thing is it came to my house yesterday as a single cover sheet plus a CD-ROM full of files, and I literally don't have a way to read a CD-ROM anymore.
I'm one of the parties to this: I founded ActBlue back in Cambridge before coming to SF and building Meteor. The funny thing is it came to my house yesterday as a single cover sheet plus a CD-ROM full of files, and I literally don't have a way to read a CD-ROM anymore.
If you don't have a way to read a CD-ROM, how do you know that it is "full of files"? Couldn't it be an audio CD?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
1. They might actually know what they are doing or 2. they aren't doing payments of the sort that needs this sort of license.
Stripe is backed by Wells-Fargo, aren't they?
Did anyone read the part where he explains that he is not being represented by a lawyer? ("REQUEST FOR CIVIL LOCAL RULE 3-9(b) EXEMPTION AND RETIREMENT.") That seems a very unusual decision indeed. Does anyone have any idea why he would do it that way? Is it probably a money issue?
Funny! After reading the first few pages, I said, "What lawyer is willing to put his name on this garbage?" and paged around in the document. Only to find no lawyer's name at the bottom, just his own. And now you confirm it. Is there some way that this isn't idiotic? I have seen a federal judge in full-on "this case is a waste of my time" mode, and it is fearsome. I would never file a document with a federal court wi…
The key to understanding this lawsuit lies in a technical point having nothing to do with the merits of the claims and which appears at pages 35 through 37 of the complaint. In that section, the plaintiff, Think Computer Corporation, "respectfully requests that Civil Local Rule 3-9(b) be retired, or that Plaintiff be exempted from the Rule given its particular ownership [i.e., owned 100% by one individual] and tax st…
Is there any avenue for a company who might see themselves as a victim of their competition ignoring/abusing laws for a competitive advantage?
The key to understanding this lawsuit lies in a technical point having nothing to do with the merits of the claims and which appears at pages 35 through 37 of the complaint. In that section, the plaintiff, Think Computer Corporation, "respectfully requests that Civil Local Rule 3-9(b) be retired, or that Plaintiff be exempted from the Rule given its particular ownership [i.e., owned 100% by one individual] and tax st…
Perhaps I'm new here, but any chance the title might get 's/Greenspan/Aaron Greenspan/'? I got real confused as to why Alan Greenspan might be suing tech companies...
I agree with pedalpete, the headline really should just say "Think Corp".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there any avenue for a company who might see themselves as a victim of their competition ignoring/abusing laws for a competitive advantage?
In this case, I don't think we even reach that question. When Greenspan's business did not obtain the appropriate license, it left the money transmission business, making it hard for me to understand how the remaining money transmission businesses (assuming that they actually are money transmitters) are his competition.
But my question still stands, is there any recourse for a company who believes it is held to a double standard with regards to direct competitors?
The key to understanding this lawsuit lies in a technical point having nothing to do with the merits of the claims and which appears at pages 35 through 37 of the complaint. In that section, the plaintiff, Think Computer Corporation, "respectfully requests that Civil Local Rule 3-9(b) be retired, or that Plaintiff be exempted from the Rule given its particular ownership [i.e., owned 100% by one individual] and tax st…
That said, I'm a little bit sympathetic to the Rule 3-9(b) thing in this context. Even if he was serious, who would take the plaintiff's side of this case on contingency?
As an aside, I think Aaron would make a great plaintiff's lawyer. Combative, self-righteous, with a ton of "burn things down" energy. This is not a negative aspersion on his character--I think it's quite admirable in a way...