They claim to have received investment from Winklevoss Capital, and both the Winklevoss twins have claimed their profiles. I imagine that wouldn't happen for a company falsely claiming their affiliation.
I’m Luciano, the co-founder and CTO of ScopeAI (https://www.getscopeai.com/). We’ve built a product that helps teams track and prioritize bugs and feature requests being reported through user feedback.
Support, sales or marketing teams report countless bugs and feature requests they’re hearing them from users to product teams. But as a PM or engineer, you need context - you need to know who’s reaching out, what they’re saying and how many people are affected.
ScopeAI makes that easier by using NLP to find all the conversations related to a bug or feature request once it’s been added by someone on your team.
Congrats to Segment! We (ScopeAI) got a chance to work with Calvin and the team to build an integration. The processes couldn't have been clearer and the value add for our customer is huge!
I agree so much that I built an entire company around it.
The insight and nuance that comes from reading support conversations is second to none but more importantly emphasizing with your user enables you to focus more on building intuitive products.
Pretty surprised how much Equifax spent trying to win this case. I'm sure they're doing it to dissuade others from suing them as well but after reading this I really want to sue myself. I wonder if they'll appeal the verdict again.
They probably don't care about the cost, it's the precedent they're trying to block or overturn. And I don't see how even the appeal can stand against further appeals (or whatever they do next to protest what they consider an invalid ruling).
IANAL, so it may not be "Precedent" with a capital P, but it is a court ruling and the guy put a huge amount of crazy stuff into it that other crazies can now point to and say "see, a judge agreed with all of this".
"The Eloby court's dictum suggests that section 117.12 was designed to preclude only appeal, motions for new trial, and motions to vacate judgment. The court's initial issuance of the alternative writ further suggests that section 117.12 was not read as curtailing the ability of appellate courts to review important issues arising in small claim actions.
Following the lead of the Eloby court, we read section 117.12 as not foreclosing appellate court review by extraordinary writ. Since statewide precedents can only be created by appellate courts, jurisdiction to decide appropriate small claims court issues must be retained by appellate courts in order to secure uniformity in the operations of the small claims courts and uniform interpretation of the statutes governing them. We do not believe that the Legislature intended to make all actions of the superior courts in such cases totally unreviewable or reviewable only on certification. (Code Civ.Proc., s 911; Cal.Rules of Court, rule 61(b).)
"
Not through an ordinary appeal, but they could file for an extraordinary writ. Given the number of small claims cases that Equifax has been facing, it might be something they would consider.
These scummy corps do it all the time. A critical illness insurance co. tried to not pay my mom because they had their own technical definition of a heart attack. She sold herself the policy, and didn't even know this. In fact, it was subsequently ruled illegal and new policies couldn't use this definition. But they flew in lawyers to her small town, so she had to go to small claims court while recovering from a heart attack. All to try and avoid paying about 20k. She settled for most of it, in the end.
