Comment by stale2002
5 years ago
My statement was that there was a risk of them running afoul of a bunch of these laws.
Not sure why you are trying so hard to straw man me on these statements.
Quite clearly there is a significant risk in running afoul of something, if you work at a company, leave, and build a project that does the same thing, and also looks very similar to it.
That was my original statement. And it seems pretty clear that there would be some risk in this.
Not sure why you have to be an asshole about a pretty obvious statement here.
But since you aren't actually addressing this statement directly, and have to go off on some tangent, that I never brought up, I can only assume you agree with my original statement.
The statment is only obvious to you. When you were asked why you think it is obvious, you just sort of wave your hands without any specifics and say "it's obvious" without providing any basis for what laws this person is "obviously" at risk of running afoul of. This doesn't add anything to the discussion.
You don't have to quote specific lines regulations, but you do need to do something to back your assertions besides just repeating "it's obvious" over and over.
> When you were asked why you think it is obvious
Do you really not see how there would be at least some risk, in cloning a former employer's company, with a similar product, that looks the same as it?
You don't see at all, how that could potentially, could at least have some risk, of running afoul of IP laws, or copyright, or any number of things?
Do you admit that there is any risk at all of this?