I'm sure this is both true and reasonable for some companies that did notes with absurdly high caps earlier (which many have) and are now raising more money. Nothing to see here.
"In 1999, Nguyen sought to catch the burgeoning unified messaging movement by the tail by founding a company to develop an Internet-based solution. Onebox.com was a hit with host service providers and users, and within two years, Nguyen parlayed his ascending reputation and Onebox.com's buzz into an $850 million merger with Phone.com."
The pro move for non-technical founders who have financing before a technical co-founder is to hire an employee as a 'technical founder' - but with a comp package that has more (greater than 0) salary and less equity than a pre-financing co-founder.
effective trial strategy does not involve any super-secret coca-cola formula strategems - the secret is exactly as described in steveblank's post: this lawyer is very effective b/c he manages to apply strategy at all in a trial setting and his opponents typically do not - mainly because it's hard.
working backwards from your goals is the best advice i've heard in a while. in the particular case where you've raised a lot of outside capital it can be pretty easy to forget how big you are supposed to get and how quickly you are supposed to get there to put yourself solidly in the success category.
several of my pakistani friends say that their parents used to go to kabul in the 70's for a break because it was much more cosmopolitan and progressive than pakistan. it's important to remember that the more recent troubles are modern, not a contiguous thread from the middle ages.
I immediately wondered how the Rodney King case would have been different if it was affected by a law of this kind. Does anyone know if the video footage would have been inadmissable?
On a different note, I have spent a lot of time in developing countries, and some of the most consistent hallmarks are ridiculous bans on photographing anything government-related. Laws like this in the US make me worry about the country sliding backwards into dysfunction.
The catch with most of these statutes is that the part that is illegal is the audio recording. If you record video without an audio track or are too far away for any audio of the encounter to be heard then you are usually in the clear. In the King case my memory of the video is that it was shot from a distance and that you can't really hear anything (checking a few archives seems to confirm that the only thing that you can really hear is helicopter noise.)
