Got a Cease & Desist. Here's What I Learned and What Every Founder Should Know

TL;DR: Earlier this year I got a cease & desist from a company called Cision to shut-down Media AI, my affordable PR & Influencer Marketing SaaS app. I ignored them and launched anyway.

Bear with me on this one going 'full Bill Ackman' here, I learned a lot from this! I hope it really helps other founders who find themselves in a similar position having left corporate to start a company.

Non-Compete aka Don’t Compete

Starting a company is challenging under the best circumstances securing funding, building a product, finding customers these tasks alone consume every waking moment of an entrepreneur's life.

But when you add a legal ‘non compete’ battle with a billion-dollar corporation to that mix? The challenge transforms from merely difficult to seemingly insurmountable. This was precisely the situation I found myself.

My vision was clear: create an innovative, affordable, and user-friendly PR and influencer media platform that would democratize access to tools previously available only to large corporations with substantial budgets. I finally launched that vision a month ago, it's called Media AI.

What I didn't anticipate was the swift and aggressive reaction from a company called Cision, which just so happens to be one of the largest PR software and services companies. I worked pretty hard for the company as a communications consultant in a brief but productive spell (in my view).

The best part of a year later, the last thing I expected was a cease-and-desist letter from them landing in my inbox, demanding the immediate termination of my fledgling company. They claimed I was violating a non-compete agreement despite the fact that my business was being built in public and independently from the ground up, with my own resources, knowledge, and vision.

In those first moments after reading their legal threats, I experienced that sinking feeling familiar to anyone who has ever faced corporate intimidation. The carefully crafted legal language made it sound as though I had already been found guilty of some egregious violation.

Then I sort of panicked a bit (more on that later).

Corporate Intimidation

The first realization that proved crucial to my eventual success was understanding the true nature of the threat. Corporate legal departments frequently employ intimidation as a first-line strategy, particularly against smaller competitors or former employees. When I received that initial cease-and-desist email, its tone suggested imminent legal doom, but a closer analysis revealed something important: it was primarily psychological warfare.

Legal threats, particularly in the early stages, are often sophisticated bluffs. Large companies send them out frequently, knowing that most recipients especially individuals or small businesses without dedicated legal departments will simply fold under the pressure.

The calculus is simple from the corporation's perspective: send an intimidating letter, and perhaps the problem disappears without having to incur the actual costs of litigation.

If Cision had a real case, they would’ve sued not just sent emails. Their approach appeared to rely on legal pressure rather than a strong legal foundation. The aggressive language, arbitrary deadlines, and vague accusations were designed to provoke an emotional rather than rational response.

Perhaps most importantly, I recognized that the burden of proof rested entirely with them. They would need to demonstrate not only that I had violated specific terms of my agreement but also that this violation had caused them actual economic harm. This realization transformed my perspective from one of defensive anxiety to one of strategic patience.

Enforceability of Non-Competes

The cornerstone of Cision's claim against me was that I had already launched a competing product (didn’t happen), and I'd already violated my 12-month non-compete agreement (no evidence). However, this argument revealed a fundamental misunderstanding or perhaps deliberate misrepresentation of how non-compete clauses actually function in most legal jurisdictions.

Non-compete agreements exist in a precarious legal position. Courts around the world, including in Hong Kong where my contract was established, view these restrictive covenants with skepticism. For a non-compete to be enforceable, it must satisfy several critical criteria: it must be reasonable in geographic scope, reasonable in duration, and necessary to protect legitimate business interests.

In my case, the non-compete language was remarkably broad and vague a common corporate overreach that often renders such clauses unenforceable. It attempted to prevent me from working in virtually any capacity related to PR or media relations anywhere in the world. Such sweeping restrictions rarely hold up under judicial scrutiny because they essentially prevent an individual from earning a living in their field of expertise.

Moreover, for a non-compete to be enforceable, the former employer must demonstrate actual economic harm resulting from the alleged violation. Cision would have needed to prove that my startup was directly competing with them and causing them to lose business a virtually impossible task given that my company had not even officially launched and had secured no customers from their existing client base.

Armed with this knowledge, I set out my strategy, prior to if/when I'd need professional legal assistance. I would need to:

1. Carefully review the precise wording of my contract, identifying its legal vulnerabilities

2. Buy time through strategic communication, bringing me closer to the expiration of the 12-month non compete period

3. Maintain a steadfast refusal to admit any violation, placing the evidentiary burden entirely on them

One thing I did that most legal professionals would advise against: I replied with a plain text email not long after theirs.

Firstly, I was 100% clear that I hadn’t breached my non-compete and preferred to get them to show their hand rather than be intimidated. Secondly, I believed their legal claims lacked clear enforceability and knew that a weaker reply on their side would confirm so (which it did). Thank god I played hours of Poker in college!

Secondly, I’d mentioned them online as part of the regular discourse on social media and, on a few occasions, somewhat negatively, in contrast to the vastly many more occasions I said good things about them.

Aside from refuting all their claims, here’s the crux of why that email worked well for me on this occasion:

- I gave a reasonable reply, while they looked overly aggressive.
- I signaled a willingness to "resolve amicably" forcing them to either soften their stance or escalate.
- My tone put them in a lose-lose position.
- If they escalated, they looked like bullies.
- If they backed down, they admitted their case was weak.

This approach allowed me to transform what initially appeared to be a devastating legal threat into a manageable situation that time itself would eventually resolve.

Don’t Poke The Bear

In retrospect, if I made one tactical error during this period, it was discussing my startup plans too openly before the complete expiration of my non-compete period. While I never announced an official launch, even casual mentions of my business concept on professional networks and social media provided Cision with ammunition for their claims.

Upon receiving their legal threats, I immediately implemented a policy of public silence regarding my venture.

First, it deprived them of additional evidence they might use in building a case against me. Every social media post, every LinkedIn update, every public comment about my business plans could potentially be twisted into "proof" of competition. By ceasing all such communications, I was essentially removing potential evidence from their reach.

Second, it prevented them from gauging my reaction to their threats. Corporate legal departments often monitor the public communications of those they've targeted, looking for signs of panic, admissions of guilt, or indications of strategy. My silence denied them this intelligence.

This period reinforced a valuable lesson for entrepreneurs facing similar situations: sometimes, strategic silence is your most powerful weapon. It denies your opponents information, prevents them from controlling the narrative, and allows you to focus your energy on building rather than defending.

Arbitrary Deadlines are BS

When faced with legal threats, the natural human instinct is to respond quickly to defend oneself, to explain, to negotiate. However, in certain situations, particularly those involving non-compete agreements with finite durations, time itself becomes your strongest ally.

Cision's initial communication established a deadline March 17 by which I was expected to provide certain assurances and essentially surrender my business plans. Rather than rushing to meet their arbitrary timeline, I made the calculated decision to wait.

The deadline came and went without any response from them.

The result was precisely what I had hoped for they expended time and resources on threats that ultimately led nowhere, while I gained the breathing room needed to develop my business until I was legally in the clear.

This experience demonstrated a counterintuitive truth about certain types of legal confrontations: sometimes, victory comes not from winning the battle but from ensuring it never properly begins.

Cease & Desist: Key Takeaways

This experience has provided valuable insights that I believe every founder should consider, particularly those launching ventures after departing from corporate positions:

1. Understand Your Contracts

Before making any business plans, obtain copies of all agreements you signed with your former employer and review them with meticulous attention to detail. Pay particular attention to:

• The exact scope of any non-compete provisions (geographic limitations, specific prohibited activities, duration)

• Confidentiality clauses and what specifically constitutes "confidential information"

• Intellectual property assignments and what knowledge you're free to use in future ventures

• The governing law and jurisdiction for resolving disputes

2. Be Strategic About What You Say/Don't Say

Until you're legally in the clear:

• Avoid discussing specific business plans on social media or professional networks

• Consider using stealth mode for initial product development

• Be cautious about LinkedIn profile updates or other public indications of your new venture

• If you must communicate about your business, be exceptionally careful about how you frame your offerings in relation to your former employer's business

3. Never Provide Written Ammunition

In all communications:

• Avoid making written admissions about competing with your former employer

• Don't acknowledge the validity of their claims or interpret agreements in ways that favor their position

• Be factual and concise, avoiding emotional language or defensive justifications

• Consider having all communications reviewed by legal counsel before sending

4. Seek Proper Legal Guidance

At the first sign of legal threats:

• As tempting as it is, don’t rely fully on ChatGPT or similar!
  Consult with an attorney who specializes in employment law and non-compete agreements

• Be completely transparent with your lawyer about your activities and plans

• Consider having your lawyer handle communications with your former employer

• Understand that legal advice is an investment in your business's survival, not merely an expense

5. Leverage Time to Your Advantage

If you're dealing with time-limited restrictions:

• Don't feel compelled to meet arbitrary deadlines set by the other party

• Understand that delay often benefits the smaller entity in David vs. Goliath scenarios

• Recognize that corporate legal departments often lose interest in cases that don't resolve quickly

• Use the waiting period productively to refine your product and strategy

Success: The Ultimate Vindication

The threats from Cision, which had seemed so intimidating initially, ultimately amounted to nothing more than corporate posturing. They didn’t prevent me from building my vision, and I had successfully navigated their attempts to shut down my venture before it could even properly begin.

There's a certain poetic justice in the fact that Cision's aggressive attempt to stifle competition only highlighted why the industry so desperately needed new alternatives. Their actions inadvertently validated my business thesis that the market was dominated by entrenched players more interested in protecting their territory than in innovation or customer value.

For founders facing similar challenges, perhaps the most important lesson from my experience is this: corporate legal pressure, while intimidating, is not insurmountable. You can win.

In the end, success is the sweetest form of vindication. David vs Goliath baby! No legal threat can stand against a truly valuable product that meets genuine market needs. And free markets mean consumers win, too.

I’ll leave you with a quote from the great Tupac Shakur:

"Death is not the greatest loss in life. The greatest loss is what dies inside while still alive. Never surrender."

P.S. - Founders, contact me directly if you experienced similar or want to connect; my email is [email protected].


- Alex