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

An Open Letter to Warby Parker

classicspecs.tumblr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 76 posts

Re: An Open Letter to Warby Parker

#31

Post by radicalbyte »

I have to wonder if there's much of a mid-to-long term market for these "NHS-style"* specs. Sure they're fashionable now but in a couple of years it'll be all brushed aluminium. Or green.

I've been buying that style of glasses for years from goggles4u for £20 a pop. Nice and cheap, look terrible but can take some punishment.

[*] NHS = National Health Service; it's a British expression based on the fact that the only glasses covered by the NHS are the cheap, thick and most of the time unfashionable frames/lenses.

Re: An Open Letter to Warby Parker

#32

Post by dfc »

ggchappell wrote: post #29

To me, one paragraph in this post stands out far above the others in importance. I find it interesting that it is getting so few comments here. It is the "P.S.". If one business sends a C&D to another, then they can't expect it to be kept private. You can argue about the wisdom of posting it, or what this says about the poster's attitude; however, Classic Specs is certainly within both legal and ethical standards in…

I could not agree more. If this story was meant to engender sympathetic feelings that last paragraph ruined any chances. However I doubt most people got that far...

Re: An Open Letter to Warby Parker

#33

Post by angersock »

ggchappell wrote: post #29

To me, one paragraph in this post stands out far above the others in importance. I find it interesting that it is getting so few comments here. It is the "P.S.". If one business sends a C&D to another, then they can't expect it to be kept private. You can argue about the wisdom of posting it, or what this says about the poster's attitude; however, Classic Specs is certainly within both legal and ethical standards in…

"But posting a customer's personal information without permission is unacceptable."

Let's be honest, now... in the age of social media, Google, Facebook, etc., that cat is long since out of the bag.

Re: An Open Letter to Warby Parker

#35

Post by tylerritchie »

dfc wrote: post #23
nirvana wrote: post #8

What's fascinating to me is comparing the impression you get from the lawyers letter (wow, they really ripped off the warby parker website!) with the response (we're using off the shelf privacy policy, and industry terms.) It shows just how deceptive selective phrasing can be. "Substantially identical" implies that the text was a copy of copyrighted material, but the selectivity is the bias- they never show that the…

From what I can see it says "substantially similar" not "substantially identical."[1] I am not a lawyer but it is my understanding that the relevant issue is "substantially similar."[2] What do you mean "they never show that the text was copyrighted"? Do you know what is required to copyright content? There is no office where you file a copyright application. Using a (c) and/or other types of copyright notices is opt…

>There is no office where you file a copyright application. Using a (c) and/or other types of copyright notices is optional in a post-Berne American court.

Copyright is given de facto, but there is in fact an office where you file for a registered copyright.

  In general, copyright registration is a legal formality intended to make a public record of the basic facts of a particular copy­right. However, registration is not a condition of copyright protection. Even though registration is not a requirement for protection, the copyright law provides several inducements or advantages to encourage copyright owners to make regis­tration...[1]
The office in question is the US Copyright office. Registering gives you benefits such as damages and attorney's fees in the event of a court action.

[1] http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ01.pdf

Re: An Open Letter to Warby Parker

#36

Post by tylerritchie »

dfc wrote: post #32
ggchappell wrote: post #29

To me, one paragraph in this post stands out far above the others in importance. I find it interesting that it is getting so few comments here. It is the "P.S.". If one business sends a C&D to another, then they can't expect it to be kept private. You can argue about the wisdom of posting it, or what this says about the poster's attitude; however, Classic Specs is certainly within both legal and ethical standards in…

I could not agree more. If this story was meant to engender sympathetic feelings that last paragraph ruined any chances. However I doubt most people got that far...

Agreed. First, very uncool to mention the wife of your competition ordered a pair. Second, dick-maneuver to not send glasses that a customer ordered and to include a snarky card instead.

Much classier would be to have sent the glasses with a note saying "I hope you enjoy these glasses blah blah blah," and never have mentioned it in a blog post that's knocking your customer's husband's company.

Re: An Open Letter to Warby Parker

#37

Post by ErrantX »

ggchappell wrote: post #29

To me, one paragraph in this post stands out far above the others in importance. I find it interesting that it is getting so few comments here. It is the "P.S.". If one business sends a C&D to another, then they can't expect it to be kept private. You can argue about the wisdom of posting it, or what this says about the poster's attitude; however, Classic Specs is certainly within both legal and ethical standards in…

Umm; so if I read that PS right (and they haven't changed it since your note) they are saying that they caught the wife of one of the owners of WP ordering TryOn's... to get samples of the product. How is that personal information? :)

People try this all the time; my parents constantly receive fake booking emails from competitors in order to wheedle their pricing structure out of them.

If they mentioned her name, or address, or something actually personal I'd agree with you...

(of course; the whole post makes them look like dicks, but that's another matter)

Re: An Open Letter to Warby Parker

#38

Post by AznHisoka »

jsavimbi wrote: post #9

Well, since the Warby Parker peeps will probably get around to reading this, I'd just like to mention that I love my SALT Topher's and will probably spend another $400 on another pair of SALT's for my spring wardrobe this year as well.

Me too, I got that as well, and just love it. This article makes me want to buy more WP glasses! So don't fret guys, we hackers aren't that easily confused.

Re: An Open Letter to Warby Parker

#40

Post by dfc »

tylerritchie wrote: post #35
dfc wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what I can see it says "substantially similar" not "substantially identical."[1] I am not a lawyer but it is my understanding that the relevant issue is "substantially similar."[2] What do you mean "they never show that the text was copyrighted"? Do you know what is required to copyright content? There is no office where you file a copyright application. Using a (c) and/or other types of copyright notices is opt…

>There is no office where you file a copyright application. Using a (c) and/or other types of copyright notices is optional in a post-Berne American court. Copyright is given de facto, but there is in fact an office where you file for a registered copyright. In general, copyright registration is a legal formality intended to make a public record of the basic facts of a particular copy­right. However, registration is…

"registration is not a condition of copyright protection"
Post reply on HN