Jump to content
Crash

Flo's Side of Lawsuit Against W. Saylor and Rofkin

Recommended Posts

49 minutes ago, ConnorsDad said:

Agreed! But if you don't want to be involved in a lawsuit over a non-compete, then don't sign one. Why do we consistently expect corporations to honor their contracts but individuals to be released or have the contracts thrown out because they are the little guy?

Because of the nature of our labor market? Hires and recruits rarely have the leverage to nullify or negotiate the terms of an employer’s NDA. Most people won’t challenge those types of agreements, even if the hiring org says it’s boilerplate or standard procedure, out of fear that their offer will be rescinded. It’s not like Willie had a union or a super unique set of skills or resources to bargain the terms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Lefty142 said:

This whole thing has nothing to do with silly willy and everything to do with the Floreani brothers having some weird sibling rivalry stuff going on.  Willie is just caught up in the crossfire hurricane. 

Did Martin honor his non-compete after he left?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ConnorsDad said:

Agreed! But if you don't want to be involved in a lawsuit over a non-compete, then don't sign one. Why do we consistently expect corporations to honor their contracts but individuals to be released or have the contracts thrown out because they are the little guy?

Um, non-competes aren't optional typically. You sign or you don't get the job. I had to sign one to work at Jimmy John's in college.

And yes, we should be biased towards the little guy. Corporations aren't people. 

Edited by uncle bernard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gimpeltf said:

Why would the founder make himself sign a non-compete?

He likely signed one if/when they sold portions to PE. Now those might be void depending on the circumstances of his departure. 

Edited by rawfunk189

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gimpeltf said:

When would that have happened? First, I believe he's been gone for more than a year but would they make him sign one while they're in the process of firing him?

Martin could have signed a non-compete at any time while he was there.  Companies have CEOs and other execs sign non-competes regularly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Broomstick said:

Did Martin honor his non-compete after he left?

I’m not sure where that idea is coming from. The lawsuit indicates that Martin signed Willie’s NDA on the employer side, so Flo is asserting that he had full knowledge Willie was violating its terms when he went to Rokkfin and posted the alleged Flo content.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, pamela said:

I’m not sure where that idea is coming from. The lawsuit indicates that Martin signed Willie’s NDA on the employer side, so Flo is asserting that he had full knowledge Willie was violating its terms when he went to Rokkfin and posted the alleged Flo content.

I meant a non-compete Martin would have signed while he was with Flo restricting his rights upon departure. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Broomstick said:

I meant a non-compete Martin would have signed while he was with Flo restricting his rights upon departure. 

OK, but where did you hear that Martin Flo signed an NDA for himself? I’m not sure where that came from or how it’s related to what’s in the lawsuit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, pamela said:

OK, but where did you hear that Martin Flo signed an NDA for himself? I’m not sure where that came from or how it’s related to what’s in the lawsuit.

It's possibly not directly related to the lawsuit but wondering if he was competing after he left but before the restrictions expired.

Edited by Broomstick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Broomstick said:

It's possibly not directly related to the lawsuit but wondering if he was competing after he left but before the restrictions expired.

he wasn't named individually, right? just rokfin for tortious interference, so I suspect he honored his NC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, pamela said:

I’m not sure where that idea is coming from. The lawsuit indicates that Martin signed Willie’s NDA on the employer side, so Flo is asserting that he had full knowledge Willie was violating its terms when he went to Rokkfin and posted the alleged Flo content.

Yeah it will be interesting to see Rokfin’s response; whether they will back Willie or say something to the effect of “he’s just uploading content to our platform, that’s on him.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Transcribed from the following link, for posterity and for the sake of discussion. Credit to @1032004 for making the first post.

https://twitter.com/martinoflo/status/1205003904469090304/photo/1

-----

To Mark Wan, Jason Krikorian, Jim Kaufman, & Mark Floreani

It has come to my attention that you, in the name of Flosports, have filed a lawsuit against a former employee, Willie Saylor.

This letter is an expression of grave concern that the board is making decisions out of resentment and revenge rather than competency and growth, with the best interest of Flosports in mind.

Please educate me and the other stockholders on your reasoning. How does a largely Silicon Valley and New York City based board suing a working class wrestling journalist in middle America strengthen Flosports position and not tarnish its reputation?

I do not want to be associated with a company that uses its position to sue working people,  entrepreneurship, and small business owners. Practicing ethically is an obligation for any modern company. We cannot  expect to hold someone's skill set hostage and seek to destroy them if they want to apply it elsewhere. I expect Flosports to be a company that values people's competency, is capable of appropriately compensating  them, and harnesses their competency for the company's growth. If you think this expectation is unreasonable or does not align with your values and practices, please explain your more reasonable position and practice.

Further, the lawsuit against Mr. Saylor raises concerns that Flosports is not able to retain talented employees. Please explain to me how a working class employee is at fault for this rather than failure of your leadership to either value his competency, appropriately compensate him for his contributions, and/or adequately harness his competency for the company's growth.

You have additionally filed suit against Rokfin, Inc. How many other lawsuits have you filed in Flosports name that I am not aware of, but yet associated with?

Your lawsuits against multiple parties cannot substitute for innovation and growth, and, indeed, indicate weakness. They raise questions about the health of Flosports. Please reassure me and other stakeholders with transparency regarding your lawsuits and specifics of how the primary goal of your multiple lawsuits is for the best interest of Flosports rather than taking vengeance on others for exposing your own incompetency.

Additionally, in the context of no communication for a prolonged period regarding Flosports position and health as a company, please provide current stockholders with an overview of your financials, accomplishments, and goals beyond these lawsuits.

Sincerely,

Christina Floreani, MD, PhD

Edited by jon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What exactly is "working people" or "working class employee?"   I think she loses all credibility in her argument by trying to suggest certain "classes" of people shouldn't/can't be sued.  This is simply a legal contract issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The letter from the sister is purely a publicity stunt, typically associated with the weaker legal position, especially since Martin disclosed it for the world to see. It is a blatant attempt to operate in the court of public opinion, and notably doesn't comment on the legal issues of the suit. Gross.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...