Hacker News new | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

A couple reactions after reading the cross complaint:

First. In a game of legal posturing sometimes a good writer can make a great deal of difference. Jermey’s lawyers are fairly good writes and they weave quite a huge story. I think as I said in original comments there is almost no way this case gets dismissed on summary judgement. That’s unfortunate because it means no easy way out.

Second. Man Jeremy is pretty dismissive of Kyle’s background and it’s downright nasty. “two successful startups” and not related to autos. Well, does Jermey have any successful startups at all? It’s not a small thing and someone unpleasant to read if you are in the startup world or have spent much time actually trying to build a business to see lawyers talking smack about a guy whose done pretty well.

Lastly, it’s a fine piece of writing but I still go back to what the hell did Jermey do for one month that would entitle him to anything. I think you have to go back to what is the convention in the industry which is a typical vesting schedule applies and that’s a risky in any startup.

I also have to say poor Kyle must feel terrible. I’m honestly kinda sick to my stomach reading the complaints. Startups are tough thing and 2.5 years vs 1 month in a big difference in blood sweat and tears no matter how much Jermey put in. It strains any reasonable amount of credulity that if Jeremy felt this way – he’d never mention it until now. I believe under the law that does weaken his case quite a bit. I forget the legal concept but in some cases when you don't speak up- it minimizes your right to speak up later.

It's deceptive to not speak up and let someone else continue building something under the mistaken belief they owned it- when you beleived you owned half. I think that's the part that has a lot of people taking Kyle's side- imagine if you built something for 2.5 years and you thought you owned all of it- and someone else believed the whole time they owned half?

There is an inherent unfairness to that and the law does recognize that.

My best advice for Kyle would be figure out a way to close the GM deal without settling as these guys are in for a fight. Get everyone else paid, close the deal and let the lawyers handle it as even reading their very well written prose- I don’t think there is a case here for Jeremy and given all the drama in the nice prose I think their lawyers know that too and it’s just a well worded shakedown.

But yeah- really a sickening read. A lot of my opinion is based on the assumption Jeremey never said a thing about this until after the huge sale. If that's the case, quote sun tzu all ya want but it's still slimey and I think against some basic precepts of US corporate law.




This "speak up" argument you use can go both ways? Why didn't Kyle "speak up" and connect with Jeremy to sort this out. I am sure he didn't forget about his YC application where he wrote 50/50. No, he instead buried his head and hoped it will just go away. It's deceptive.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: