[mijamo]

Not everything is an asset. You do not legally own the credit card numbers. At most you own the right to use them to fulfill a contract. Just like if I share my screen with an IT support company that does not give them the right to suddenly transfer my screen to an advertising company, except if I have been explicitly told that would happen (and no, terms and conditions are not enough for that, because it is way out of the expected behavior of the contract, just like having terms that make the user pay a billion dollar on each visit would not make it work either).

[sillysaurusx]

If card data isn’t property the way that customer data is, and isn’t transferable during an acquisition, then it’s hard to see how Fly Maid wasn’t in violation of the law here.

It seems like this should be readily answerable: in the event of an aquisition, does the acquirer have the legal right to use the card authorization token from the customers of the acquired startup? Note that Fly Maid did not charge them without their consent; they merely made the option available without them having to enter any CC info.

The reason I’m pressing this is because we’re talking about a YC alum + illegal behavior, which to my knowledge might even be a first.

Hopefully a lawyer might chime in with clarification. If Fly Maid was not authorized to utilize any of HomeJoy customers’ CC info during the course of business, regardless of acquisition, then this seems pretty clear cut.