Hacker News Reader

Comment by blackeyeblitzar | Hacker News Reader

I feel like in general, the complex structures and legalese in the startup world are set up against founders and against employees. Is there anyone pushing for simplification or standard forms or structures that are not just in the VC’s or acquirer’s interests?

View on HN

Attorneys like repeat business. They’re much more likely to do business again with a private equity firm than a founder, so even if they nominally represent the founder they’re not going to do anything that would jeopardize their prospects for future business with the private equity firm.

> so even if they nominally represent the founder they’re not going to do anything that would jeopardize their prospects for future business with the private equity firm.

Ouch! Seems like there should be some 'unionised' legal representation for founders. Seems like representation for founder and VC to be a conflict in interests.

This seems to be much heavily emphasised on capital vs talent.

> Seems like there should be some 'unionised' legal representation for founders

Just pick a lawyer who works for founders. (Any competent firm will also find this in conflicts.)

You’re the only one who reliably can work in your best interest, and even then it’s hit and miss sometimes.

Always ask questions, figure out others actual and stated interests, and look for incongruencies.

And look to be as educated as possible.

Easy to say, hard to do. There is no ‘sure thing’ in this world.

About that: https://siliconhillslawyer.com/2017/01/01/avoid-captive-comp... which contains links to some other good info.

On the asymetric power between repeat players (VC) and founders: https://siliconhillslawyer.com/2019/02/18/relationships-and-...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com