chris-weed-piano

Chris Weed, Pianist

@chris-weed-piano

communist strong sad

  • he/him
log inask
chris-weed-piano
@chris-weed-piano
giwake
@giwake
vogon
@vogon

twitter is threatening to sue facebook over threads

gotta say that I'm inclined to trust facebook's assertion that this accusation is groundless given

a) I'm not sure what Secret Sauce for social media that twitter has but facebook (a company which operates at 5 times the scale) doesn't
b) elon dumped 20,000 engineers onto the streets of san francisco the instant he walked in the door and I'm sure recruiters at other companies were primed to go over people's noncompetes with a fine toothed comb
c) [pointing at twitter] c'mon

I assume the move here is supposed to be convincing a judge to issue an emergency injunction to shut threads down while facebook and twitter negotiate a settlement, but I got no idea how likely that is

You must log in to comment.

in reply to @vogon's post:

irina
@irina

Spiro accused Meta of hiring dozens of former Twitter employees who “had and continue to have access to Twitter’s trade secrets and other highly confidential information.”

lol if former employees can get all your confidential information, you fucked up

login to reply
LEGO-brionicle
@LEGO-brionicle

i mean i’m not on any twitter copies but why go over the huge megacorp twitter copy instead of the smaller ones like mastodon and bluesky? sounds like something to make a headline of and nothing else lol

login to reply
vogon
@vogon

big thing is that threads apparently got installed 30 million times in its first day of operation; this compares to mastodon's 2-3 million active users and bluesky's 100-200,000 total registered (the semafor article says their last official announcement was 50,000 users a month or two ago, but this is what I've heard they're at more recently.)

mastodon (because it's open source and afaik .social's operations team is primarily european) is hard to draw a connection between former twitter staffers and; bluesky is owned by jack dorsey, who (apparently) still gets on okay with elon

login to reply
kero-was-taken
@kero-was-taken

the relevant legal text is California BPC division 7 part 2 chapter 1. as far as i can tell legally binding noncompetes exist in california, but only when the employee signs them in anticipation of the business itself dissolving, or in anticipation of their professional interest in the business terminating (so not just departing, but also holding no stock)

specifically customer lists are protected

i don't think any of these exceptions apply to the current case

login to reply
Renpona
@Renpona

I think the move here is threatening to use discovery to dig through Facebook's messages and archives, in hopes that Zuck will be so scared of being embarrassed that they'll give in and make big concessions so they don't have to actually go through discovery

just like how Musk and his pals were thoroughly embarrassed by discovery in the Twitter lawsuit, and then he gave in and agreed to buy right before he was set to testify under oath in a deposition where they were likely to ask some rather uncomfortable questions about the stuff they found in discovery

login to reply
vogon
@vogon

the one thing that makes me suspect otherwise is that I believe zuck and the rest of the facebook brass to be canny enough (and the company buttoned-up and bureaucratic enough) that they don't leave embarrassing stuff lying around where it can become the subject of discovery; I believe the litigation against elon was either against him or against X Holdings which was obviously a pretty meaningless shell company.

login to reply
Renpona
@Renpona

imo, elon is making the classic mistake of assuming his enemies have all the same problems and weaknesses that he does

he's scared of discovery and terrified of testifying under oath, so he assumes Zuck must be too

login to reply

in reply to @vectorpoem's post: