Comment by binarysolo
12 years ago
Presumably his contract prevents him from discussing internal issues with any outside party.
(Knowledge source: Got totally screwed by a business partner via legalese and had all my work stolen, ended up doing half a year of work uncompensated, can't legally talk about it or the partner, and loss < cost of litigation. Ah well, water under bridge.)
Well a big part of this whole problem is that he had no contract to begin with ("We never signed any contracts or work-for-hire agreements").
That aside, he works as a freelancer in an industry where naming and shaming specific agencies could very well hinder his ability to get future work, so I don't blame him for not doing it.
Probably more to do with him already taking content down to avoid their litigation - avoiding naming them looks like it follows on from that.
The article says no contract was signed.