Hacker News Reader

Comment by _b8r0 | Hacker News Reader

I draw two things from this:

1) Don't do business with Jason Calcanis. This is not the first time I've heard Calcanis-related drama, won't be the last. Not that I ever was going to do business with him, nor him with me mind.

2) Don't do business with Michael Arrington. He washes his dirty laundry on a very public blog without regard for his business associates (in this case, AOL).

Drama never leads to good business practice.

View on HN

"2) Don't do business with Michael Arrington. He washes his dirty laundry on a very public blog without regard for his business associates (in this case, AOL)."

Posting this on techcrunch is, to me, an effective way of warning people not to mess with him and preventing future suits. The message I got was "Don't sue Michael Arrington unless you absolutely know you have the right of it".

There was a comment by lionhearted about a month ago on how he stopped people from bullying him. (Which seems to be what Arrington is doing to Calcanis.) http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1765109

"I wished I'd learned that lesson earlier. Some people are animals. The ones that want to hurt you for no reason. Show them that you'll go to self-destructive lengths to defend yourself and avenge yourself upon them, and they'll stop."

But surely people must know this by now, and it still goes on. How many private flare-ups and legal notices have been posted on Techcrunch in the past five years? Joojoo was blowing up about this time last year. Yet the bullying/suits against Arrington continue.

Anyone with an ego that rivals Arrington's knows this, but they think that they are going to be the one that finally topples the private empire Arrington has created. Delusion at its finest. Not that I think Arrington is without fault. He probably thinks the same thing against many of his rivals, but they don't publish personal sob stories of how Arrington is trying to screw them on their company blogs, which seem to have less readers than TechCrunch anyways.

> Posting this on techcrunch is, to me, an effective way of warning people not to mess with him and preventing future suits.

I would like to respectfully disagree with you on this point. If I entered into a contract with Mr Arrington and had a dispute, I'd try to resolve through all non-legal means possible. If these fail then as a last resort I'd go to the courts. Posting on techcrunch acts as an effective warning never to enter into a contract with him that could result in a lawsuit.

> The message I got was "Don't sue Michael Arrington unless you absolutely know you have the right of it".

The message I think you should've got was, "Don't enter into a contract with Michael Arrington unless you absolutely know you have the right of it."

To be fair to Mr Arrington, I think this article says a lot about Jason Calcanis as well.

I think my point about Drama still stands. It doesn't lead to anything good business wise. It's just not a good move for anyone from where I stand, although YMMV.

If someone has been publically slandering you and is now threatening legal action I think you're well within your rights to fight back however you see fit.

From what I've seen of Mike Arrington, I have little reason to doubt that what Calcanis has said is true. That doesn't make his handling of the situation justified, but I think the hardon HN seems to have for Mike Arrington is entirely unwarranted, and motivated more by the hopes for favourable TC coverage than by rational analysis.

Sorry to say this but your baseless accusation of the HN community is also unwarranted.

Based on my experience, it's neither baseless nor unwarranted.

How far does "however you see fit" go? Escalation to the nuclear option is rarely, if ever the correct course of action.

It's the option Arrington usually goes for (i.e. Angelgate, Crunchpad collapse etc.)

I suspect in TechCrunch's case publicizing every lawsuit threat acts as a deterrent, resulting in much less legal hassle than they'd face otherwise.

Legal action would seem more appropriate than counter-slandering...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_defamation_law#De...

Physical violence?

Kidnapping?

Arson?

I think Arrington is very justified. As he said earlier he has been silent until now. Patience does have a limit ?

Arrington has had his own share of business drama as well:

http://techcrunch.com/2010/09/15/status-of-crunchpad-litigat...

I understand it as a dramatic device. Being quiet to start with makes the shouting seem louder.

But it IS good business for TechCrunch, isn't it. Isn't that the whole point of him posting this stuff publicly?

But they do report news. Had they simply ignored it as it blew up, wouldn't it be more childish to not cover it? I think Arrington handled it rather professionally, and didn't sink to the lows that Calcanis has.

You raise some very interesting points. I think your point about Arrington not sinking to the lows that Calcanis had is a very interesting thing to say (as Calcanis' side of the story hadn't been heard at the time). What I do believe is that Arrington has 'sunk', perhaps not to the lows he implies or explicitly accuses calcanis of sinking to (and I'm not suggesting calcanis has or hasn't sunk to those lows) but by publishing it separately instead of just waiting for the case he's played his hand early and I think he's at the very least 'sunk', although I could be wrong. That's the great thing about legal judgements, everyone looks like an arsehole, no matter what the truth.

I hope that neither you nor I face a major lawsuit, especially over something so frivolous as a disagreement between grown men.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com