by Mike Masnick
Fri, May 2nd 2008 5:41pm
After eBay released its side of the story in the eBay-Craigslist lawsuit, we noted that it looked pretty damning against Craigslist, but we wanted to hear Craig and Jim's side of the story. Well, their initial response isn't all that convincing. At best, it highlights a few points in the lawsuit and claims "but eBay did the same thing!" But, that's not at all accurate, unfortunately. eBay isn't suing Craigslist because it has a poison pill, or because it wants a staggered board or the right of first refusal agreement -- as Craigslist implies. It's suing because Craig and Jim put those provisions in place by themselves, without the wider consent of the board or eBay as a significant shareholder. In other words, Craigslist's response isn't on the meat of the lawsuit, and appears to be missing the point entirely. One would hope that their response in court has more substance.
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Amazon, Cable Industry Molest The Definition Of Copyright In Ongoing Scuff Up Over Cable Box Reform
- Tennessee Study Shows State Remains A Broadband Backwater Thanks To AT&T Lobbyists, Clueless Politicians, And Protectionist State Law
- A Fan's Case For Putting Batman & Superman In The Public Domain
- Nothing About The Story Of An Artist Being Threatened With A Lawsuit Over A Painting Of A Small-Dicked Donald Trump Makes Sense
- The Unbelievably True Story Of How Craigslist Murdered Over 100 People