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

I give him credit for actually talking publicly with people.

Most CEO's hide behind the PR department, or speak only one-way, without replies.




> Most CEO's hide...

As they should when they're so divorced from reality that they provide the justifications that this guy has. Open dialog is nice, but it doesn't mean much when the underlying message is that of hostility.


Yes, but his reply reminded me of the saying 'it is better to keep quiet and be thought a fool, than speak and remove all doubt'.


You'd feel better if he lied to your face?


No, but I'd feel better if he didn't spout a whole pile of gobbledygook. Let's just say that if this were the CEO of the company I was working for when faced with an existential crisis such as 'lets encrypt' I'd be out in a hurry. This can't end well and in spite of the situation he's still the most visible part of Comodo and should have a very cool and wise head at times like these.

If this is any reflection on his mental state and processes Comodo is dead.


I've seen this happen before at a company that I'm too embarrassed to name, where leadership started to behave irrationally like ants infected by zombie fungus. The CEO wanted laptops to be stocked in checkout aisles - where impulse buy items go... I knew right then that we were dead. I don't think this guy has fungus on the brain, but there is an unseen cause: maybe it is ISRG eating his lunch, or maybe the thought of Microsoft doing the same as Win 10 pushes into the corporate environment.


English is his second language. So, some mistakes are OK. But going public while emotional is never a good idea.


I'm loathe to give him credit for publicly saying the most ridiculous things imaginable from one in his position.


Right. I'm glad he spoke publicly because it shines more light on how ridiculous his position is.

He actually tries to justify (or deflect) stealing the Let's Encrypt trademark by claiming LE stole the concept of a 90-day cycle. Ridiculous.


> He actually tries to justify (or deflect) stealing the Let's Encrypt trademark by claiming LE stole the concept of a 90-day cycle. Ridiculous.

You can patent business methods, but saying a 90-day cycle is an "inventive concept" would likely cause a competent attorney to take you to one side and quietly convince you to not point that fifty-caliber BMG at your leg.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_method_patent


That's not really the heart of the issue. He seems to be taking it as a point of honor, as if someone is stealing his business model ... but LE isn't a business.

Comodo might or might have innovated a 90-day free trial. But let's say for a moment that Comodo did invent the 90-day free SSL trial. The intent is for the promotional purpose of purchasing paid products. LE has no paid tiers, and the primary motivation is to help the internet get encrypted, not to sell certificates. What's ridiculous isn't the idea that a 90-day cycle got "stolen", but that the Comodo CEO persistently thought of ISRG as a business competitor when they are not even in business. (No one is fighting you, dude).

What I don't get is why so many people kept playing into that erroneous assumption of his instead of calling him on it.


Just because they are not in it for profit doesn't mean they are not a competitor to his business. It actually makes it worse from a purely business perspective.


Yes, and that's why he wanted the trademark. To kill them.


Sure, but most CEO's tend to determine exactly what their public-facing position IS before speaking. In this case he looks the fool as they're walking back his statements.




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

Search: