[brackin]

You get what you pay for I guess. Their mobile app looks terrible, tries to copy the Path sharing functionality in a completely strange context. When something like this could be created with a far cleaner interface.

In a strange way I understand the position the CEO may be in. They may have thought because they weren't going to use it they shouldn't have to pay. In the past I've paid a designer for work only to change my mind on a product but that isn't the designer's fault. You still have to pay whomever completes work for you, even if you don't use it.

Just sounds like across the board naivety, rather than malice especially with the legal department comment. It's always best to sort problems out immediately and directly or they get in the way.

[geekfactor]

Based on the screenshot currently gracing the eligibleapp.com home page, perhaps the CEO specifically requested a Path knock-off. ("We really love the Path app, can you make it look like that?")