|
Well, the lawsuit is still rather interesting from the standpoint that these two companies did interact under NDA. Now the details aren't specific about what was shown (although that will likely come to light during the discovery phase), but there are rumors that don't lend a lot of credit to Spring Design's case.
As an engineer, I'd be surprised if B&N wasn't developing the nook prior to their meeting. 6-7 months just isn't enough time to push a product from conception to launch. Normal product cycles are closer to 12-18 months, easily up to 24 months for new products, depending on the sort of rush the company is in and how much work is done for them ahead of time.
I read a hypothesis posted by someone on Engadget's comments, which makes a ton of sense: Spring Design was looking for a brand to carry Alex, and approached B&N. B&N, with the nook in development, probably was looking at it from the angle of getting the Alex to carry B&N content (like other models coming out that will support the B&N eBook store). They went their separate ways at that point. Rumors of the nook started landing with details, and Spring Design took it as abuse of the IP displayed under NDA and moved to do what they could in terms of legal action.
The linchpin in this includes a comment that the design of the Alex in April was likely not the same design as posted up the days before the nook announcement. If the design was indeed different, and/or B&N can prove their design predates the interaction, that would undermine a big chunk of Spring Design's argument.
But, yeah... the lawsuit is happening, and I'd say that the law firm representing them was smart to ask B&N to hold off shipping until the preliminary injunction hearing was held and the results known. Sucks, but it is what it is.
|