http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/ Engadget Comments for TechCrunch sues Fusion Garage over the Joojoo -- we break it down http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/Dec 11th 2009 1:33PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/Dec 11th 2009 1:34PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/Dec 11th 2009 2:31PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/Dec 11th 2009 7:24PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/
SHUT UP..... just shut up.... you lost me from 599.00 ;) ]]>Dec 12th 2009 12:19AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/Now lets see how it ends...]]>Dec 11th 2009 1:34PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/
Hey loser, there is a soup kitchen down the street!

AHAHHHAAHAH!

on your knees bitch]]>Dec 11th 2009 1:38PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/
I wonder if they will make a movie out of this case as well :-D]]>Dec 11th 2009 1:46PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/
In this case Arrington didn't invent anything. All he did was say "Hey, wouldn't it be cool if somebody made a tablet with XYZ features and sold it for $200?". Ignoring the fact that X, Y and Z are common sense features of any tablet, FG did all the actual engineering and software development. Arrington's contribution was exactly zero. This is a nuisance lawsuit, and he deserves nothing.]]>Dec 11th 2009 2:45PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/Cute, must be the same lawyer who worked on the 'patriot act'

]]>Dec 11th 2009 1:47PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/Dec 11th 2009 2:02PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/Dec 11th 2009 2:21PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/I was not saying it was controversial now was I? I was saying it's obviously something you can throw at anything really to get it in court (like the word patriot was used to sell something), and you 'failed in your duty' to understand that, I'll see you in court then shall I?

But fuck this, it's the weekend already again and you people can start to bitch and gripe about all my posts and I will ignore it all until those made starting monday when I once again will take your (as in everybody here) complaints serious.

Have a nice weekend.]]>Dec 11th 2009 3:25PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/Dec 11th 2009 1:48PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/
AAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAH

pure LOL

Among others? can't wait to hear the rest. Pathetic.]]>Dec 11th 2009 1:49PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/
It is such a commentary on the current state of this country, where people think that everything has a monetary value... even worthless suggestions. Good grief talk about frivolous claims...]]>Dec 11th 2009 2:44PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/
According to Mr. Arrington, simply stating an idea - however obvious - means you own it forever, regardless of your actual contribution to making a product based on the idea. That's great!

- Hey, wouldn't it be cool if there were underpants that made you fly? -

There, I just "invented" flying underpants. If anybody is ever able to make underpants that fly, they have to cut me in on the profits or I'll sue them. ]]>Dec 11th 2009 2:54PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/Dec 11th 2009 3:38PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/I mean, it must have taken him whole MINUTES on Google to come up with those ideas.]]>Dec 12th 2009 6:01PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/
Or at all.]]>Dec 11th 2009 1:52PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/
The point is, it has the potential to prevent this tablet from coming out - depending upon what else MA does in court - to make a difference. We'll find out how stiff the competition is, at CES.]]>Dec 11th 2009 2:26PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/Dec 11th 2009 1:54PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/
If this is the case, why didn't he find someone else? There have got to be a million tech companies that would jump at this opportunity; what was stopping him?]]>Dec 11th 2009 1:58PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/
That's basically the fraud claim. He previously didn't know all those issues, because FG had lied to him, otherwise he would have partnered elsewhere.

Allegedly]]>Dec 11th 2009 2:23PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/Dec 11th 2009 2:55PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/I fail.]]>Dec 11th 2009 2:01PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/Dec 11th 2009 2:01PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/Dec 11th 2009 2:09PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/
I understand. I didn't really mean "don't cover it". I think Mike meant don't say "go buy this product!!!!"]]>Dec 11th 2009 2:15PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/Dec 11th 2009 2:41PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/Dec 11th 2009 2:09PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/Dec 11th 2009 2:12PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/Dec 11th 2009 2:13PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/Dec 11th 2009 2:14PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/Dec 11th 2009 7:18PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/Dec 11th 2009 2:28PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/
The lesson for readers is that developing, manufacturing and successfully marketing any product is hard. Creating a browser in a tablet that is a cost effective alternative to existing products is very hard.
]]>Dec 11th 2009 2:35PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/Dec 11th 2009 2:46PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/
You say that: "Of course, this doesn't explain how Fusion Garage was able to put its software on the CrunchPad prototypes at the outset, but that's the claim." If you read the lawsuit, it clearly says that Fusion Garage just used an "off the shelf browser" and HTML to demo at first, something that TC did not know at the time.

You also seem to be doubting that this was Arrington's idea - it's pretty clear that this was the case. He posted the exploratory ideas on his blog, and they created two prototypes before Fusion Garage came into the picture for "Prototype C."

And the thing about false advertising? One of the parts of that claim is that FG's actions significantly harm TC's reputation among consumers and in the tech/business community, and that is something that has obviously happened because of this mess.

It seems like a pretty clear-cut case to me, and I think the naive, uninformed way that you guys at engadget have been covering this drama damages your credibility. Is it jealousy? I don't know what it is, but trying to cast doubt on a situation which is pretty obviously not 50/50 (under the guise of being fair to both sides) is inexcusable.]]>Dec 11th 2009 2:36PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/Dec 11th 2009 2:43PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/Dec 11th 2009 3:17PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/
Very nice post. Would down rank again.]]>Dec 11th 2009 11:35PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/Dec 11th 2009 2:41PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/You have a wishlist of features that the average gadget-geek can envision (!)

You create buzz around it using the (cheapest?) digital media with unrealisitic price claims and make money while doing so by increasing blog visitors.

You let somebody else take the entire risk of developing the gadget - just empty promises of a future aquisition.

You find out that the original price might not be feasible at the scale of production.

You are ready to scrap the project, since you have nothing to lose (no money, no effort wasted)

You are pissed when you find out that the company who developed the gadget wants to proceed with the idea and you would be left out.

You start creating negative press and litigation as a CYA effort.

-> Pathway to total technology domination

]]>Dec 11th 2009 2:42PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/My suggestion for Mike is to sell Crunchpad as hardware and let users put ChromeOS, moblin or whatever else they want to do with it. From what I have seen it is a Atom 1.6 with broadcom HD accelerator, atheros wifi, Linux community will rally behind and help out with drivers for touchscreen if it was proprietary code from FG.
Since FG has burned bridges with Pegatron, I’m sure Pegatron will be willing to work with you to put this guys in ground. If you announce today that you are doing preorder for 1000 units at $399, I’m sure you will sell out. I was considering buying joojoo just for the potential the hardware has. I’m not interested in their OS but I have been waiting for such hardware for so long…its had me considering to take a chance I wouldn’t otherwise.
Send 10 units as gifts to ChromeOS team and let them code ChromeOS to take full advantage of the hardware..who knows google might buyout CrunchPad, Inc to release googoo .
As you have said in you post, FG does not have enough money to cover legal costs so I doubt they would file injunctions against you as you are selling a PC without OS. Its a plea from a techie to not deprive us of a good piece of hardware. My CC is ready and waiting…]]>Dec 11th 2009 2:42PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/Dec 11th 2009 2:51PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/Dec 11th 2009 3:31PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/
And maybe he did give them some ideas, but thats irrelevant unless he had an agreement or owned a patent. Its perfectly legal to use unpatented ideas from other people who give them to you freely under no formal agreement.

Arrington seems like he wanted to be the big dog here who would make FG's dreams come true with just a smile. I am sure if FG hadn't gotten sick of him he'd be claiming he invented it. Hell, hed prolly pull a Jobs and put his name first on the patent.]]>Dec 11th 2009 2:45PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/
Not to mention that perfectly obvious "ideas" have no value. All Arrington did was say "somebody should make a tablet, and it will have a web browser, and be cheap!". That's not really a valuable idea.

If I say "Somebody should make a bicycle, but it can fly!", does that mean my idea for a flying bicycle has value? If somebody really does create a flying bicycle, do I get paid even though I didn't do anything to make my "idea" into an actual product? Of course not. Just vocalizing the possibility of a product is not "inventing". If that were the case, then science fiction writers would be billionaires.]]>Dec 11th 2009 3:05PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/11/techcrunch-sues-fusion-garage-over-the-joojoo-we-break-it-dow/
I've seen this in my scientific work too. Some people think showing you how to use a piece of equipment or teaching you a common technique is grounds for authorship.]]>Dec 11th 2009 4:46PM