From the comments I know that this will not be a popular reply, but I do feel like he crossed a line by reproducing something he worked on commercially even if he had no intent of selling it. While everyone is rightfully astonished by the CEO unprofessional tone (and I really don't condone it), he did see the design documents, technical specs, and whatnot.
Replit used legal threats to kill my open-source project
231–240 of 1001 posts
Re: Replit used legal threats to kill my open-source project
#232Contact the FSF for advice, I'm sure they would like your project to join million others with legal backing!. Good luck!
Re: Replit used legal threats to kill my open-source project
#233A fancy funded company like Replit getting scared by an intern's weekend project is entertaining. If your moat is so low it can be replicated in a few days, I think this open source project is the least of their worries.
Gosh, I wish I received 20 million in funding for that idea that needed three days to be technically replicated by an intern.
My wish: Replit should sue intern, intern should get free attorney from EFF, case should be dismissed as "WTF" in court. Future CEOs will know that "an intern would need three days to technically replicate" is not a differentiator. Also, hope is not a strategy. VCs would learn that hearing BS from CEO is not "due diligence".
Intern would eventually be showered in money for speaking to further CEOs about that one mistake they should never do.
The world would move on and be a better place for everyone, except unprepared CEOs.
Re: Replit used legal threats to kill my open-source project
#234Wow, what a fuck-up. I canceled my Repl.it subscription already, and I intend to migrate off the site entirely as soon as I can.
Re: Replit used legal threats to kill my open-source project
#235I don't think there is any fundamentally original idea in replit. It is a time-sharing system where you can log in and use a programming language. We have had those since not long after the dawn of computing. Since at least 1970, we also had smart terminals that allowed the user to fill in a form, and validate it, before sending it to the host. So the time-sharing session being carried out by a protocol between the w…
Why does it have to be original to be a product people will pay for? There are plenty of unoriginal yet profitable products. What you've said is all true, but most users today don't use computers like that. Arguably developers already do if they have SSH access somewhere, but if repl.it brings that experience to a general audience via a web browser then it's already valuable. If the Chrome cloud VM idea[1] can raise…
I agree with you but nothing about the comment was discussing whether or not people will pay for repl.it
The context of this HN post is about originality itself.
Re: Replit used legal threats to kill my open-source project
#236Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would play devil's advocate here and say that the situation is probably muddier than it is presented in the blog. Also there appers to be a level of trust here (at least the Replit CEO trusted that OP will not make this go viral on HN and spiral into a PR nightmare I suppose, which though is the most entertaining path it can take) Not sure how talented OP is. This can as well be a case study of who not to hire.
Yeah, we are just getting one side. That said, all the possible IP in something like this is in security, reliability, scalability and good UX. Severely doubt the OP spent much time on that. The CEO is probably just having trouble dealing with stress and is acting out. It happens.
>The CEO is probably just having trouble dealing with stress and is acting out. It happens.
I agree it's not uncommon for first-time founders/CEOs to see phantom ghosts and lash out; however, we should be careful to not normalize that kind of behavior. Founders often hold mentorship or supervisory positions over their current and ex-employees, so it's harmful when they react with aggression and manipulation.
At small companies, that betrayal of trust cuts deeper than it does in more common manager-employee relationships, IMO.
Re: Replit used legal threats to kill my open-source project
#237Repl.it should have no fear from this. A: There was no plans to make it commericial. B: It wasn't intended to be a CLONE.
Re: Replit used legal threats to kill my open-source project
#238The threats seem directly at odds with the CEOs tweet here https://twitter.com/amasad/status/1401617251464138754 This whole saga is pretty sad really. While replit isn't doing very much in wrapping these languages in a frontend (and something that is clearly straightforward to replicate), they are doing all the work that comes with scaling that to many users on the web (I guess that includes moderation). They should…
The difference between what Amjad tweets publicly and what Amjad threatens the ex-intern privately is jarring.
That makes me think that either the tweets are empty virtue signaling; or Amjad is legit worried that an intern open-source project can accidentally outcompete his company!
Re: Replit used legal threats to kill my open-source project
#239Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed... but the intern is obviously incredibly naive in thinking that repl.it would be happy to see one of their ex-interns working on a project that does pretty much the same kind of thing they're doing... whether or not this is a threat to them right now. There's a tiny, but non-zero chance, that this project could become successful and who knows, take marketshare from repl.it... and while everyone is pretending…
> Agreed... but the intern is obviously incredibly naive in thinking that repl.it would be happy to see one of their ex-interns working on a project that does pretty much the same kind of thing they're doing.. whether or not this is a threat to them right now. There's a tiny, but non-zero chance, that this project could become successful and who knows, take marketshare from repl.it... Too bad, that's business and how…
Why bother? Seems throwing their money around is functionality well enough.
Not sure what they'll do if another company decides to reinvent it.. but /shrug
(to be clear, not defending them at all)