As someone who was close to the situation, let me clarify some obvious errors in this article:
- Dave Maestri was never employed by SGN. He worked for Freewebs (www.freewebs.com)
- Dave never ever worked on any game or Facebook related product at Freewebs.
- SGN is not an "iteration" of Freewebs, it's a spin off. This is like calling Frasier an iteration of Cheers.
- Dave left Freewebs, not SGN.
- "Maestri will pursue Zynga..." - This is not ever going to happen.
On a different note, this comment is a great summary of the game, if you haven't played it: "$1m/month in revenues… incredible for a game I used to play on the TI-83. Seems like everything old is new again, except when add in a little social spice it becomes insanely popular."
> It was first created by Maestri while still employed at SGN’s former iteration, FreeWebs, under the pseudonym Jason Gilbert. That alone is evidence that the game actually belonged to his employer.
No. That alone is not enough. I hate you Mike Arrington. Die in a fire. Those contract clauses are complete bullshit, as evidenced by the decision in this lawsuit. That's the only thing that is proven here. I can't believe someone would side with the bloodsuckers that come up with those ownership clauses.
I created an account here just to comment on this. I am not aware of the whole story here, specifically if he did the game development on his own time (i.e. while not at work). However, I employ several software developers for the development and maintenance of a billing system which we deploy using a SaaS model. I would be very upset, and would in fact view it as fraudulent activity, if one of those developers built a competing product, especially while they were at work and I was paying them to do work for me. And, even if the developer did all the work at home, I would still have IP concerns. How would I know he was not ripping off a bunch of ideas or code from work?
I know that hackers are a fiercely independent lot, as I am myself, which is why I started my own company. However, we have to be careful that we don’t go too far with the “stick it to the man” attitude. Put your self in the employer’s shoes. What if you started a company, put in a bunch of money and time, only to find out that one of the people you hired was developing a product very similar to yours on the side. How would you feel about that?
I don't really envision a hacker stealing his employer's code. If he's going to build a competing product it's likely because he's up with the code at his day job.
As far as I can gather, the most that SGN has against Maestri is the possibility that "his success with Mob Wars was his insight into the company’s infrastructure and intelligence." I see no mention of it being developed on company time.
So he learned from his experiences, was bored, and made something on his own. If he was my employee then I'd say "good for you (and you can leave since you obviously don't need this job)."
If you can't learn something from a job, then what have we all been putting on our resumes? Some things fall under (questionably enforceable) non-competes, and some things don't. If you learn how to run a purchasing department at K-Mart, does that mean you can't use the knowledge you gained to run the purchasing department at Target? What qualifies as "infrastructure and intelligence"?
Well, let me know if you ever raise a bunch of capital and start a successful company. I will come work for you, gain a bunch of "experience", and re-create your company on the side. When I get the "atta boy" from you, I will move on.
I don't have any deep knowledge of the case, but I think it's worth noting that he apparently built the thing while working at the precursor to SGN, FreeWebs, which has a different business entirely.
It's possible he built it while they were in the process of retooling/spinning off as a gaming company (which would be pretty questionable), but if he built the app in question beforehand, it seems ethical to me (legal or not.)
Quote: "The Mob Wars game goes to Maestri, but SGN will have rights to create similar style games itself. SGN also received an undisclosed financial settlement."
So not a win as such then.
Plus I rather suspect that creating a new game while employed by a game development concern is sailing pretty close to the wind.
It's a huge win. They could clone his app anyway. Zynga already has. My understanding of IP law as pertains to games is that unless they infringe on his trademarks (which is impossible anyway since app names are unique on Facebook) there's precious little he could have done about it.
SGN effectively got nothing beyond whatever money was in the settlement there. It's about all Maestri could possibly hope for.
not having to give up an established million dollar company with tons of paying customers is a win in my book. Even if he paid a million in penalties, he is still better off.
"The Mob Wars game goes to Maestri, but SGN will have rights to create similar style games itself. SGN also received an undisclosed financial settlement."
He won? Then why is he paying a financial settlement to SGN?
- Dave Maestri was never employed by SGN. He worked for Freewebs (www.freewebs.com)
- Dave never ever worked on any game or Facebook related product at Freewebs.
- SGN is not an "iteration" of Freewebs, it's a spin off. This is like calling Frasier an iteration of Cheers.
- Dave left Freewebs, not SGN.
- "Maestri will pursue Zynga..." - This is not ever going to happen.
On a different note, this comment is a great summary of the game, if you haven't played it: "$1m/month in revenues… incredible for a game I used to play on the TI-83. Seems like everything old is new again, except when add in a little social spice it becomes insanely popular."