Comment by tw04

5 years ago

>It copied even unique, invisible aspects of Replit's architecture that I consider to be flaws.

And yet you haven’t managed to tell anyone what these “invisible” aspects are. So it kind of just sounds like you’re making things up.

What right does the public have to know this? None. It's their secret sauce, it's reasonable they don't want to publicize it.

Obviously, Radon has every right to know. But not us.

  • They made claims and threatened legal action; certainly the public doesn’t need to legally know until a lawsuit is actually brought, but they would be required to present such evidence to the public in court.

    Do they have to currently? No, of course not. But this isn’t someone claiming that another did something behind closed doors to bait public disclosure. They opened this door by making the claims, from a standpoint of whether one might want to do business with replit in the future it’s entirely reasonable to ask for proof of what otherwise are slanderous claims.

    • You don’t have to reveal your trade secrets in open court. They can be shown to the judge “in camera” and redacted from public filings.

      If all you had to do to get a company to reveal all its secrets were to sue it on some plausible legal theory and conduct discovery, everyone would do it.

      1 reply →

  • Sure, Public - None, the accused as in Radon has absolute full right. You can't simply make an allegation and not back it up

    If the CEO had engaged with Radon in a rational civilized manner the situation would have never reached this stage.

  • The project is open source. The public already knows. His proposed plan of action, a lawsuit, would also bind him to make those details public.

  • Doesn’t mean he couldn’t have told the former intern though, who supposedly would already know this, and it appears the exact opposite happened instead and instead a threatening stance was taken with no attempt at reconciliation.