Appears that OP, a former Replit intern, used Replit to create a site that might be construed as a Replit competitor. Replit responded with a heavy hand.
I don’t care about Replit. But this just seems like a bad idea.
Tbf Replit is an online IDE for full stack development, that means that almost any idea you work on Saas dev tooling could be construed as a competitor.
Yes so you should keep that in mind if you sign documents specifically agreeing not to do this in the next 2 years... we may never know what the guy signed, but I assume interns at least sign NDAs.
The fact that CEO is a (insert bad word) is also true, however.
It doesn't matter if he used replit they don't own the code you write with it and it doesn't matter if he used to work there they don't own former employees either.
If you remove the irrelevant details it can be shortened to A personal created what could be construed as a replit competitor this seemed like a bad idea which only makes sense if it's a bar owned by the mafia.
Furthermore they didn't respond "with a heavy hand" This statement carries the implication that some reaction was warranted and they overdid it.
A manipulative sociopath reacted to a non-issue by using insane threats to silence someone on the off chance that he might become a legitimate competitor.
Did you catch the part where he made it about him him growing up a "struggling kid from Jordan" whist still essentially asserting most of the same position.
Once you create a product/project that is in some ways similar to that of a former employer, you have entered potential conflict-of-interest territory. If you can afford the time and legal expenses to argue that it is not a conflict of interest, that's fine. If you cannot, then you should think twice about what you are doing.
Should it be that way? The answer is a definitive maybe. Part of the reason why the legal system exists is to resolve disputes like this. The real problem is the cost and time involved make it mean that both parties rarely have equal access to it, and that it is often used as a heavy handed threat by those who know they have better access to it (with the end result being to silence people rather than seek a just resolution).
As for the personalities of the parties involved, that has nothing to do with it. You can be the biggest jerk in the world and be right, or the kindest person in the world and be wrong.
The term conflict of interest is meaningless in context of someone who no longer works for you. There just can't be one. If you work for a McDonald's then and open a burger king next door there is no conflict your public goal was first to aid your employer and now it is to destroy them.
It's not a dice roll to find out if you are infringing on IP. If you are aren't infringing you can discourage a lot of bullshit by simply ignoring their strongly worded letter. It costs 30 seconds to send an email but your lawyer needs something real to work with.
If a former employee of mine uses proprietary information to build a competitor, I’d be upset. The key is what is classed as proprietary. You start barking up the software patent tree and you never know what the lawyers will throw back down.
I don’t care about Replit. But this just seems like a bad idea.