Conversation

Replying to

@compuguy

@ComradeEevee

and 42 others

Hell according to Daniel he has 50% ownership of the company. If

@_copperj

would like to clarify this and other shenanigans, I'm listening:

Quote Tweet

Daniel Micay

@DanielMicay

Apr 3, 2019

Stop spending substantial time every day spreading misinformation and lies about me. Stop presenting false accounts of my volunteer week at previous projects like Rust. Stop using sockpuppet accounts. Stop covering up what happened and hiding the existence of the real project.

Show this thread

This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more

Replying to

Simple question: Is it or is it not accurate to say Daniel owns 50% of the company?

Replying to

I do still own 50% of the company even today... My rights as a shareholder were not / are not respected and neither was the agreement made by the company about supporting the open source mobile privacy/security hardening project. Copperhead isn't involved in the project anymore.

Replying to

Copperhead is now just a scam attempting to profit off of the past association with the project now known as

@GrapheneOS

. In theory, I have a financial interest in Copperhead succeeding since I still own half of it. However, that doesn't change my opinion on the company one bit.

Replying to

It's also really just in theory that I have an actual financial interest in it succeeding, because I get no cut of the revenue despite developing nearly the entirety of everything they use with barely any compensation for it. I also didn't write it as an employee of the company.

Replying to

I never had any employment agreement with Copperhead or any contracts to work on the code. The work was my open source project developed on my own time and Copperhead had agreed to support it as such. I learned the hard way not to trust people, even people I thought were friends.

Compuguy, Friend of kittehs....

Replying to

Every company I've worked for has had an employee agreement. That is surprising to say the least....

Replying to

They portray it as if I am just some disgruntled former employee rather than the person who created and developed the entire open source project and co-founded the company. There were 3 co-founders but only 2 left by the time the shares were divided which is why it was 50-50.

Replying to

And to clarify something, it was supposed to be a security consulting company. The open source mobile privacy and security work that I was doing was not supposed to be the entire basis for the company. I just ended up being the only person doing any meaningful amount of work.

Replying to

It was explicitly agreed with the other 2 co-founders (including James) that I would own and control the open source work that I was doing. The business model of the company was doing security consulting work. It wasn't supposed to be based around this own source project anyway.

11:57 PM · May 7, 2019Twitter Web Client

Likes