You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Evidence of Steemit Inc making representations about use of ninja-mined stake
- I am posting via SteemPeak so images are stored there. Also I have copies on my own computer.
- A Court will imply this from the commitments made. Obviously if you promise its for the development of the chain etc, you can't sell for profit.
Interesting & good to know. When we look at the raw transaction, it does show image URLs like
https://files.steempeak.com/file/steempeak/apshamilton/9xYZTUbQ-Screen20Shot202020-03-0420at2022.22.15.png.But when viewing this post on SteemPeak, it uses URLs from https://steemitimages.com. Possibly @steempeak is relying on a version of the STINC servers to save bandwidth. Not sure.
Yeah I just don't see any of the STINC statements reaching the level of a promise or even commitment. I do think if investors were mislead, then there is potential reason for Ned to be worried, but perhaps not any binding obligations that would pass onto Sun. Although it would help to see the contract of sales between Ned and Sun. I guess the argument is that Sun is still bound by all obligations of the company.
I see both sides, but wasn't the expectation that STINC would always sell at least some of its stake for personal enrichment? This was not a non-profit by any means.