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

Cloudflare S-1

sec.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 366 posts

Re: Cloudflare S-1

#261

Post by amaranth »

big_chungus wrote: post #185
gen3 wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. The file is the only thing with legal protections.

Actually, not necessarily. Drawing font glyphs is certainly protected by copyright (even if not filed, an implicit one) as artwork. You probably wouldn't get prosecuted because they probably couldn't prove if you copy-pasted, but it's still the work of an artist.

Typefaces are not covered by copyright in the US. Bitmapped fonts aren't either as that's just a computerized version of a typeface. Other types of fonts are covered by copyright as they're computer programs that tell the computer how to draw the typeface. This means unless a typeface was created for and used in a trademarked logo there is no protection on it and you can freely recreate it by tracing the output of an existing font.

Re: Cloudflare S-1

#262

Post by big_chungus »

pacoWebConsult wrote: post #240
favorited wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Who decides what's controversial? CloudFlare, in this case.

What's the difference between this and choosing not to bake a cake for a gay couple? Plenty of people cheered Cloudflare for taking down TDS and 8Chan, but the same people got up in arms to demand a private business provide service to a protected class. Last time I checked political affiliation was a protected class in CA and political activity was a protected class in CA & NY.

> political activity was a protected class in CA & NY.

Yes, but cloudflare is not denying a job to any of those people. Not to mention there are certainly threats of violence on those sites, which are technically illegal. That's grounds enough to take the site down.

I argued above that cloudflare's actions were concerning, but at the end of the day, it's cloudflare's network. Do you really want the state compelling by force a firm to carry the traffic of any one? I don't, and find it the only option more concerning than a firm arbitrarily refusing to do business.

I personally dislike the actions of cloudflare in this case, and am allowed to criticize them. However, I don't think it makes sense to have the state enforce my criticism via compulsion.

Re: Cloudflare S-1

#263

Post by big_chungus »

djmobley wrote: post #188
big_chungus wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then this sounds like a contractual issue between Cloudflare and such people. I don't see why financials have to be publicly available for this to happen. In any case, it is rare that a company goes under with no warning. Even if it's not "public information", it's usually evident if it's seriously strapped for cash.

Contractual assurances aren’t going to help you when a company is insolvent.

Correct, but you take a risk when doing business with any company. You find ones of good repute, you meet with representatives. Usually, it's noticeable if a company is really struggling. It is not the job of the state to make business transactions risk-free, only to provide courts for the adjudication of fraud and breach of contract.

Re: Cloudflare S-1

#264

Post by a13n »

michaelt wrote: post #170
a13n wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The owners will make more money if they double the company's value than spend their profits on a 5% dividend to shareholders. Simple capitalism at work.

...but less money if Google spends the 5% on Google Plus or an Google Messaging Platform No.8 and doesn't double the company's value.

These are huge swings. Each of these projects has the potential to increase the company's value by $100B and only cost single digit $B. Same model as VC.

Re: Cloudflare S-1

#265

Post by i_cant_speel »

the_duke wrote: post #14

The free tier of Cloudflare has been really amazing for small to medium websites. It gives you a basically unlimited CDN, SSL, HTTP/2, DDos protection and fast DNS servers with almost 0 effort... for free ... Thus increasing the stability and speed of many web properties that otherwise wouldn't pay for it. I'm afraid this could easily change once the company is public and is under the pressures that come along with i…

I'd imagine there is significant value in capturing small customers with a free product who end up growing into their enterprise products.

Re: Cloudflare S-1

#267

Post by chocolatebunny »

whatshisface wrote: post #136
erikig wrote: post #129

Both CloudFlare and Zoom are pretty great products and as much as I applaud their team's IPOs, I'm worried that the vagaries of being a public company will result in the GOOG syndrome. That's where a company with a great product is forced to expand every quarter to the point that it becomes a frankenstein-ish hulking version of itself.

Why not just pay a dividend? That's what stocks are supposed to be, shares of ownership in legitimately valuable enterprises with return on investment.

The purpose of an IPO is to raise money to do something. It doesn't make any sense to sell part of your company to a random set of people, just to pay them back over time. That's like me getting a mortgage for my house and after 30 years I pay back the mortgage and the bank still gets to own my house.

Re: Cloudflare S-1

#268

Post by mstibbard »

chocolatebunny wrote: post #267
whatshisface wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not just pay a dividend? That's what stocks are supposed to be, shares of ownership in legitimately valuable enterprises with return on investment.

The purpose of an IPO is to raise money to do something. It doesn't make any sense to sell part of your company to a random set of people, just to pay them back over time. That's like me getting a mortgage for my house and after 30 years I pay back the mortgage and the bank still gets to own my house.

That's exactly it's purpose though. If you only want a loan you would be raising debt (i.e. corporate bonds) rather than selling equity.

Re: Cloudflare S-1

#269

Post by bufferoverflow »

davchana wrote: post #236
the_duke wrote: post #14

The free tier of Cloudflare has been really amazing for small to medium websites. It gives you a basically unlimited CDN, SSL, HTTP/2, DDos protection and fast DNS servers with almost 0 effort... for free ... Thus increasing the stability and speed of many web properties that otherwise wouldn't pay for it. I'm afraid this could easily change once the company is public and is under the pressures that come along with i…

This. I have about 20+ hobbyish domains total, & 13 of them are with free Cloudflare Plan, & 3 of them are with their Domain Registrar side. I am completely fine with their free tier & paying for Domain Reg/Renewal. But just in case if in future i need to paygor DNS hosting, I would fallback to regular domain registar's free dns.

I had one website that I was working on, basically zero traffic, besides me testing it. After a couple of months Cloudflare kicked me off the free tier, asked for money. No idea why. I didn't use much of their resources, well within the limits.

Re: Cloudflare S-1

#270

Post by pm90 »

pastor_elm wrote: post #257
freehunter wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What more would you expect from them? Not looking for an argument, honest question.

AWS-like cloud infrastructure

Yep, this would be a godsend. They're already doing something similar with Workers and I do hope the trounce other cloud providers in providing a "Serverless Cloud"
Post reply on HN