Each side has its perspective and points. Each side points fingers: "Scum", "incremental", "non-compete", "stole our idea", "couldn't breathe".
I'm not sure which side Amy Wallace falls out on, but both sides are right. And both sides are wrong:
In this day and age, ideas should not be owned. One-click by Amazon: obvious and ridiculous. Reuseable garment bag: more obvious and more ridiculous. Ideas are on a level playing field and competition - the only one that matters - is for customers.
If anything, Mr. Siegel by way of offering to invest hundreds of thousands of dollars offered to combine ideas and resources which may have created a more effective competitor.
The idea of a non-compete after buying two of something at a tradeshow and then a conversation over drinks at a Santa Monica hotel: ridiculous. It's just like an entrepreneur in our industry asking an angel or VC to sign an NDA and non-compete.
And for the record, the Eureka moment does not matter at all, either in purpose, practice or philosophy.
I'm not sure which side Amy Wallace falls out on, but both sides are right. And both sides are wrong:
In this day and age, ideas should not be owned. One-click by Amazon: obvious and ridiculous. Reuseable garment bag: more obvious and more ridiculous. Ideas are on a level playing field and competition - the only one that matters - is for customers.
If anything, Mr. Siegel by way of offering to invest hundreds of thousands of dollars offered to combine ideas and resources which may have created a more effective competitor.
The idea of a non-compete after buying two of something at a tradeshow and then a conversation over drinks at a Santa Monica hotel: ridiculous. It's just like an entrepreneur in our industry asking an angel or VC to sign an NDA and non-compete.
And for the record, the Eureka moment does not matter at all, either in purpose, practice or philosophy.