It's been a few blissful months since we've thought about or had to interact with the Joojoo, but the court case Michael Arrington and TechCrunch filed against Fusion Garage just reached a significant milestone: the judge threw out several of Arrington's claims while importantly holding that TechCrunch and Fusion Garage were in fact business partners with legal obligations to each other. Here's the basic timeline so far: since there was (unbelievably) never a contract between TechCrunch and Fusion Garage to develop the CrunchPad / Joojoo, TechCrunch had to rely on a variety of alternative arguments in its initial complaint, which reached a zenith of optimistic fabrication in something called "misappropriation of business ideas." (We ran down the whole list way back in December, and also broke down Fusion Garage's subsequent motion to dismiss in February.)
The court didn't buy most of those arguments and dismissed everything but the breach of fiduciary duty claim in this latest ruling, which is both a significant loss and a significant win for TechCrunch: breach of fiduciary duty has always struck us as TechCrunch's strongest argument, and the court's now effectively ruled that Fusion Garage and TechCrunch were indeed involved in a joint business venture with legal obligations to protect each others' interests. That's not a bad position from which to proceed -- although TechCrunch now has to prove that Fusion Garage actually violated its duty by releasing the Joojoo on its own, which is a whole new fight. (The court also gave TechCrunch 20 days to try and amend some of its other claims, but "misappropriation of business ideas" was basically thrown out the window entirely.) So what's next? We're guessing another few months of cheerfully hostile motions accusing the opposing party of thwarting discovery and some firecracker depositions, all culminating in a matched pair of snippy motions for summary judgment. The suits, they dine well tonight.
P.S.- How or why either company continues to pay for all these legal bills is beyond us, but we've actually heard rumors of a Joojoo 2, so things could get even crazier. And potentially even less responsive to touch-based events.
Joojoo lawsuit shocker! Court rules Fusion Garage and TechCrunch were business partners, tosses most everything else originally appeared on Engadget on Sun, 29 Aug 2010 21:27:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.
Permalink 
Daring Fireball | 
Ruling (Scribd) | Email this | Comments
And the intellectual property rollercoaster continues. The BBC is reporting that Microsoft's second appeal against a judgment granting $240 million in damages due to content in Word that infringed on patents held by i4i was today rejected, leaving the Redmond giant with a huge fine to pay atop its undoubtedly sky-high lawyer bills. In the latest ruling, the judges state their belief that Microsoft was explicitly aware of i4i's patents before implementing the relevant XML code into Word, which is about as damning as these things can get. Still, Microsoft might be able to appeal yet again, depending on a panel ruling on the matter, and if all else fails, this can be taken all the way to the Supreme Court. Crazy or what?
Microsoft loses second Word patent appeal, on the hook for $240 million in damages originally appeared on Engadget on Fri, 12 Mar 2010 08:54:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.
Permalink | BBC | Email this | Comments
After three years of spent treasure, Sharp and Samsung have finally settled their LCD patent fight. Although the terms of the agreement won't be made public, a Sharp spokesman was caught boasting about conditions that "will be in favor of Sharp" -- the company that kicked off the battle back in 2007. As a recap, the disputed patents covered LCD TVs, monitors, and mobile phones in lawsuits filed in the US, Europe, Japan, and South Korea. After a string of defeats in the US and Europe resulted in an import ban on its panels, Samsung, it seems, was left with little choice but to settle on Sharp's terms.
Sharp and Samsung settle LCD patent cases, end legal dispute originally appeared on Engadget on Mon, 08 Feb 2010 06:12:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.
Permalink | PC World | Email this | Comments
Corporate legal teams are so large, so powerful, and often so evenly-matched that when you combine them with the glacial wheels of justice, patent disputes can take years to resolve -- in fact, we'd say it's the rule rather than the exception -- and inevitably, they end in anticlimactic fashion with the alleged offender agreeing to shell out some fraction of the plaintiff's original request in exchange for sweeping the whole matter under the rug. Nokia's had its fair share of such spats, and one that's been dogging the company for a good long while now is with InterDigital, which has been systematically targeting firms in the industry for years with claims that it holds patents inherently required for UMTS -- in other words, if you make UMTS gear, you automatically owe InterDigital money. Of course, Nokia has been politely disagreeing with that claim all along, and the US International Trade Commission has just issued an initial determination in its favor, saying that it doesn't violate the four patents InterDigital's all worked up over. For the record, the US ITC has been investigating this issue for a solid two years now, so yeah, if someone's ripping off your IP, don't expect a speedy resolution. The commission's initial determination will be followed by a final, binding determination this December; in the meantime; Espoo "will continue to present its case." Now that we think about it, we're pretty sure we saw this episode of Law & Order already.
Filed under: Cellphones, Wireless
Nokia / InterDigital patent drama continues with ITC ruling in Espoo's favor originally appeared on Engadget on Fri, 14 Aug 2009 21:54:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.
Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments
