Sibling comments have brought up some good points about the baseless claims in this post. The CEO also quotes this Let's Encrypt blog post on "Why 90 Days":
> "Ninety days is nothing new on the Web. According to Firefox Telemetry, 29% of TLS transactions use ninety-day certificates. That’s more than any other lifetime"
> so whose certs are these? Of course Comodo's!!! So they are admitting they are copying our innovation of 90 day free ssl certs!
So is the CEO saying that 29% of TLS transactions on the web are on sites which use Comodo's 90-day free trial SSL certificates, probably used on sites with the least traffic on the web? That at any one time, 29% of TLS traffic is over an unrenewable 90-day trial cert? Huh, seems implausible for some reason!
----
The post right above is also misinformed as well:
> From a legal standpoint (ISRG) should have trademarked this when they started using it publicly in November of 2014. There negligence to have done so is why this debate is happening. Then they want to cry foul because of their failure to follow the simplest of product protections. Registering your trademarks. The one who is in possession of the registered trademark is the owner, and that is the law.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but "from a legal standpoint," there has to be evidence of use in commerce before a trademark can be registered, and it's crystal clear that Comodo did not use "Let's Encrypt" in commerce, and it's also crystal clear that ISRG did.