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

Aaron Greenspan sues Facebook, Sequoia, Andreesen, YC, others

scribd.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 180 posts

Re: Aaron Greenspan sues Facebook, Sequoia, Andreesen, YC, others

#151

Post by ricardobeat »

nostromo wrote: post #68

There is something to be said about how in the US it's often best not to contact regulators at all, and to simply fly under the radar for as long as possible. That said, this guy is seriously toxic. Just by responding to his emails in a friendly manner can get you named in a lawsuit... and to blame competitors instead of regulators... Seems like someone to be avoided at all costs.

Bear in mind this guy has spent a fortune and has been severely screwed over by regulators, while dozens of startups operate in the clear with similar services. He could probably get over the hurdles with funding, but who's going to put his feet into this mess? I'd be freaking out too.

Makes me wonder, if had he operated under the radar for a while, and gradually complied with newly imposed regulations, things would be ok. Even if he got a massive fine, that'd be good publicity, and he must be spending a ton on lawyers anyway.

Re: Aaron Greenspan sues Facebook, Sequoia, Andreesen, YC, others

#152

Post by cinquemb »

dangrossman wrote: post #138
cinquemb wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Airbnb says that they are being paid for the service they provide, and part of that contract with their customer is to pay a property owner (like an Travel Agent), does that change things? Would a Travel Agent be called a money transmitter? As someone asking someone else who seems to know more about this than I, does this lawsuit have legs to stand on? [Edit: seemed to be answered here https://news.ycombinator.com…

Travel agents are also licensed in California (and other states). They also have to post a bond to cover any money they're holding on behalf of customers, just like a money transmitter.

I see. Looking into the background of all this, I think there is an argument to be made… whether it will be heard or not in this context is a different story.

Well maybe this presents the perfect opportunity for these VC and portfolio companies to retreat offshore to the tech seastead they created for their very own special SEZ (semi-jokingly).

Re: Aaron Greenspan sues Facebook, Sequoia, Andreesen, YC, others

#153

Post by redthrowaway »

larrys wrote: post #149
redthrowaway wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point of non-mandatory tipping though is that it feels good for both the sender and the receiver. It gives the sender the warm fuzzies for giving even a trivial amount, and the receiver gets a concrete demonstration that their efforts are appreciated. Hiring someone to do a job certainly pays better, but its transactional nature negates the mutual emotional benefit of a token of appreciation freely given.

I don't have the reference (or a link) but I remember pretty clearly that (might have been Cialdini or similar) a principal where attorneys would do for free what they wouldn't do for, say, $50 per hour. As an example I serve on the board of a condo and I'm paid $0. Most likely if I was told I would be given $25 for every meeting I would think "my time is worth more than that" and it would actually be a negative (fig…

As soon as you bring compensation into the equation, people measure it against what they expect they should be compensated.

I saw a thread on reddit earlier discussing Dennis Rodman's entreaty for Kim Jong Un to "do him a solid" and release the American who was arrested for photographing homeless children in North Korea. One of the commenters argued that this actually could work, due to the Korean principle of "Jeong", or helping out friends simply for the sake of helping. An appeal to Kim's rational best interests would be measured against his own appraisal thereof, but a personal request from a friendly acquaintance doesn't carry with it that baggage of zero-sum gamesmanship, and so is more likely to be heeded. It was an interesting argument, and I certainly don't think the concept is limited to Koreans.

Re: Aaron Greenspan sues Facebook, Sequoia, Andreesen, YC, others

#155

Post by carbocation »

pg wrote: post #137
tptacek wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's funny, I was thinking literally the exact same thing. I just put some money onto Watsi, and I think I'll keep doing that every time we get 'grellas top-post.

Or startups could just hire him as their lawyer. Parse did and they are happy customers.

I did as well, and I found Grellas and his team to be fantastic to work with. I probably owe it to him to submit a more thoughtful, in-depth write-up.

Re: Aaron Greenspan sues Facebook, Sequoia, Andreesen, YC, others

#156

Post by andrewljohnson »

ralphleon wrote: post #145
pg wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or startups could just hire him as their lawyer. Parse did and they are happy customers.

PlanGrid did as well! Highly recommended.

Grellas has been our lawyer since 2008, we also highly recommend.

Re: Aaron Greenspan sues Facebook, Sequoia, Andreesen, YC, others

#157

Post by nemothekid »

ricardobeat wrote: post #151
nostromo wrote: post #68

There is something to be said about how in the US it's often best not to contact regulators at all, and to simply fly under the radar for as long as possible. That said, this guy is seriously toxic. Just by responding to his emails in a friendly manner can get you named in a lawsuit... and to blame competitors instead of regulators... Seems like someone to be avoided at all costs.

Bear in mind this guy has spent a fortune and has been severely screwed over by regulators, while dozens of startups operate in the clear with similar services. He could probably get over the hurdles with funding, but who's going to put his feet into this mess? I'd be freaking out too. Makes me wonder, if had he operated under the radar for a while, and gradually complied with newly imposed regulations, things would…

Apparently that was first avenue of action. He says here : https://www.facecash.com/legal/brown.html

that he applied, but they required his company to raise 80 million dollars before he could pay $5,000 fee.

Strangely enough however, he also claims to have built facebook (although the language keeps it vague enough that you aren't aware of his contribution)

Re: Aaron Greenspan sues Facebook, Sequoia, Andreesen, YC, others

#158

Post by mdlevinson »

bitteralmond wrote: post #154

This doesn't seem as much like an actual attempt to gain compensation as it does to simply get a law changed.

I believe you're absolutely correct. It seems rather obvious that he has no standing here, and was not injured by the defendants' actions. But he is extremely knowledgable about these regulations and has a very valid set of complaints regarding the lack of clarity of the law and the lack of predictability in how it is enforced.

Re: Aaron Greenspan sues Facebook, Sequoia, Andreesen, YC, others

#159

Post by prostoalex »

Moto7451 wrote: post #77
jluxenberg wrote: post #6

Some context: (1) Think Computer Corporation built FaceCash ( https://www.facecash.com/ ) a mobile payment solution (2) Aaron Greenspan is Think's President and CEO Maybe he's trying to get these companies to lobby against "money transmitter" regulation.

Some additional context about past litigation: http://abovethelaw.com/2012/06/facebook-litigation-continues...

For fuller context don't forget Aaron Greenspan vs Google, Inc. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/aaron-greenspan/why-i-sued-goo...

Re: Aaron Greenspan sues Facebook, Sequoia, Andreesen, YC, others

#160

Post by kalleboo »

dangrossman wrote: post #81
cinquemb wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So in the case of AirBnb, their service is helping people find places to stay?

Is all the money you pay to Airbnb for the service of helping you find a place to stay? Or is most of it being transmitted to the property owner after the end of your stay? Yes, it is; they are acting as a money transmitter. Money transmitters typically take some of the money; they're licensed businesses, not charities.

But wouldn't that apply to Xbox too? Most of the money you spend goes to the game developer.
Post reply on HN