Hacker News Reader

This is actually reasonable. Without this, Snap would be asking for lawsuits from anyone that submits an idea that’s even close to an upcoming feature. At the end of the day, this incubator relies on trust, and founders should never take money from someone they distrust anyway.

View on HN

it seems pretty one sided as far as trust goes

The idea is that I, an adversarial actor, could submit an (or many) applications, and then sue snap if they ever release a feature that resembles any of those submissions.

Basically, as a potential incubatee, I need to trust Snap. For them to remove that clause, Snap needs to trust that there will be 0 adversarial applicants. Thus a one-sided trust metric makes some level of sense.

Ok that makes sense now on its face it seems incredibly adversarial to the point where they could force you to be a drug mule as a team building exercise. But when you put it this way it makes perfect sense. Without this kind of protection you're open to a lawyer placing bogus applications just to launch series of lawsuits to effectively destroy the program for everyone.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com