Yahoo returns acquired startup to founders
e27.sg
e27.sg
What good is the domain without the code? They could rewrite the code from scratch. Though, that maks me wonder... If I single handedly write a piece of SW that does "X" and sell it to Yahoo. Can I then make a new site / app that dose "X"? Is it copyright infringement (a la the android / oracle Tim Sort) since anything I write that is an identical app is likely to have very similar, if not identical, code?
How much of what is in my head is mine and how much is covered by copyright if I've written it before?
One example that comes to mind is Miller Puckette, who wrote Max, and then a few years later wrote its main open-source competitor, Pure Data. It seems quite possible to write a clone of your own software without literally writing the same thing, especially if it's been a few years and you have some new ideas about how to do it now. My guess is that doing so would most often be sunk, if it is, by software patents or explicit clauses in the sale terms, rather than copyright.
Quite often part of the purchase agreement is that you won't build a competitor to X for a certain number of years. Sometimes they go as far as not competing with the acquirer at all for that duration.
And if you use code that was included as part of the purchase, you're playing with fire.
a rockstar team ... successfully exited the company to Yahoo
I assume this is trying to invoke the jargon use of "an exit", but in this context it has a garden-path reading implying that the team succeeded in quitting the company. I probably would've just said "successfully sold the company".
Although exit is of course a verb, it's use in this sentence is pretty confusing given the fact that they're undoubtedly referering to "an exit".
Such as? I'm not doubting you, I'm just curious to know.
If Amazon had developed it they'd have called it 'Data Processing Services' and charged for how many cycles it took up.
On top of that, Yahoo ain't financially dead a la Nokia and RIM. Yahoo is very profitable, with billions of revenues and net income. I wouldn't write off Yahoo just yet.
Talent acqhires needs to be clear and not overpromise and under deliver. There's nothing I respect more than transparency, and there's nothing I despise more than koolaid. Koolaid works for some, necessary evil for uniting a company during hard times, but not for the guys (and gals) who've been in the trenches and understand the game. Maybe this is part of the game, but who wants to go through the legal headaches to make an acquisitions and then go back to HR to find human capital replacements 1-2 years in because they got frustrated and left?...
[Edited for my stale information on what they did with Delicious, last summer. Phew!]
Who, it pains me to say, proceeded to make it horribly worse and then do nothing with it.
First I've even heard of this thing