Copperhead registered the grapheneos.ca and grapheneos.net domains and redirected them to their site. I had my lawyer intervene and those redirects are now removed but they still have the domains. It's yet another example of their desperate attempts to harm us.
5
11
1
76
It's part of their continued attempts to fraudulently claim ownership over my work and to misrepresent themselves as the ones who created it. I started the project in 2014 before the company was founded in late 2015. The project has never been owned or controlled by Copperhead.
1
0
0
21
I created CopperheadOS before Copperhead existed. I never did that work for anyone but myself on my own time. It was formally agreed upon that I owned and controlled the open source project. Copperhead chose to ship the upstream releases of my project instead of making their own.
1
0
0
20
renlord.com/posts/2020-03-25… is another example of their desperation. They attempted to get a student contributing to open source software in trouble with university via fraudulent copyright claims. They're regularly harassing GrapheneOS developers/contributions with these attacks.

6:30 AM · Dec 30, 2020

1
1
1
19
It's verifiable that none of the CopperheadOS code was attributed to the company. After pushing me out, they filed a fraudulent copyright claim over my work listing me as the author but falsely claiming that I had assigned copyright to the company. It's completely without basis.
1
1
0
14
Not only was there no copyright assignment to Copperhead but it was formally agreed upon from the beginning that I would own and control the open source project. I was only willing to work on it under that condition. It was regularly acknowledged that this was how it worked too.
1
1
0
17
Copperhead had 3 co-founders: myself, James Donaldson and Dan McGrady. McGrady was there for the incorporation agreement but left before shares were divided. This is not a case of there people two people with different accounts of what happened. There are witnesses and evidence.
1
0
0
14
It is verifiable that GrapheneOS is the continuation of the original project and that the new CopperheadOS was created as a fork. It's verifiable that it was published with attribution to me as author and owner. You can see they added bogus copyright headers when they forked it.
1
2
0
18
nitter.net/DanielMicay/stat… This code for secondary stack randomization was published in 2015 under the Apache 2 license. It was attributed to me as the author and owner. None of my work was ever done under any contracts or as an employee with a salary or any employment agreement.
Replying to @DanielMicay
renlord.com/posts/2020-03-25… is another example of their desperation. They attempted to get a student contributing to open source software in trouble with university via fraudulent copyright claims. They're regularly harassing GrapheneOS developers/contributions with these attacks.
Show this thread
1
0
0
11
I was paid out a share of the profit as a co-owner of the company, not as a salary. Copperhead retroactively tried to frame it as a salary to get grants, to fraudulently pass along tax burden to me and as part of trying to take back agreeing to me owning my open source work.
1
0
0
9
There was never any contract for the work or any salary. There was no employment agreement or any amount that was determined to be a salary. There is no actual record of my receiving a salary. There were no pay stubs or anything like that because it wasn't what was happening.
1
0
0
8
They pulled the same kind of bullshit by retroactively going back and misrepresenting payments as shareholder loans. They did that to roll the 2017 payments into the imaginary 2018 salary, where they conveniently said barely anything was withheld for taxes to pass that on to me.
1
0
0
11
Since they fudged the numbers to their benefit retroactively, there's no actual basis for any of that. There was no employment agreement and no salary so they just fudged the numbers. It was supposedly dividends until it suited their interests to retroactively change each year.
1
0
0
11