Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
| AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci | Twitter
Sean Fallon | Twitter
Jack Loftus | Twitter
John Herrman | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Chris Mascari
Kat Hannaford | Twitter
Rosa Golijan | Twitter
Chris Jacob
I love how you guys throw in "we'll have to wait and hear" at the very end, when your posting makes it clear that you are just accepting Arrington's word as gospel on the subject and have already indicted FusionGarage as the evildoer in the situation. Could your bias for Arrington be more obvious?
Drowned in a bathtub of greed and selfishness? They weren't working on the cure for cancer. It was a business relationship. Get off your high horse.
@rhys1882: Well, we'd love to get FusionGarage's side of things, but they haven't updated their page since February, Mr. White Knight.
Even so, it's hard for me to imagine any sort of circumstance where this kind of thing would be acceptable. At best, even if it is completely legally above-board, it's kind of a dick move.
Edited by HeartBurnKid: Agent of R.O.A.C.H. at 11/30/09 4:10 PM
HeartBurnKid: Agent of R.O.A.C.H. was starred
HeartBurnKid: Agent of R.O.A.C.H. was unstarred
"Mostly though I’m just sad. I never envisioned the CrunchPad as a huge business. I just wanted a tablet computer that I could use to consume the Internet while sitting on a couch."
I hate to say it but that was a fundamental flaw in TechCrunches thinking. It is and will be a Huge Business, Apple and others are chomping at the bit to get a device like this into the market, whoever does this first (and well) will reap big $$$.
And this is why is sounds like TechCrunch fell prey to predatory investors. Those bastards have no soul when it comes to ideas, it all about profit.
It sounds like TechCrunch could have used a good Patent Attorney along time ago.
@Bertone77: I suspect that is Arrington's way of casting himself in a more sympathetic light, rather than an admission that he didn't protect himself legally. He says in the article that they own the IP jointly and that he fully intends to sue the pants off of everyone shortly.
Wow. That's a very interesting twist. I have no idea whether I should believe Arrington's explanation - I don't have any personal reason to distrust him, but I generally don't believe just one source, especially when that source tries to present a hero-vs-villain story (and the source is the hero). That said, it's sad that the CrunchPad is dead. I was looking forward to it. I guess I'll have to take a closer look at the Archos devices, or one of the thousand other devices coming out running Android or whatever.
The corporate greed demonstrated here is just enraging. How can a shareholder convince themselves that this is a good move? This is absolutely ridiculous.
Hmm, I don't see how they could get away with stealing the project out from under him without some sort of IP litigation. I would hope lawyers are getting involved if it truly played out as stated.
So... they are not being forced to do this for no money... they chose to do the work for exposure instead of cash. I dont get how this makes google evil. If the artists dont want to work for no money, then dont.
@Geisrud - MS150 fundraising time!: There is no legal issue here. This is simply a matter of Google acting like a dick to weasel free work by leveraging "exposure" as if that were good enough.
If they were soliciting work from complete unknowns, that would make sense, but they are trying this on experienced artists who've done global campaigns for major multinational corporations. It's insulting, and shows how ignorant Google can be when it comes to anything other than coding.
11/30/09
Drowned in a bathtub of greed and selfishness? They weren't working on the cure for cancer. It was a business relationship. Get off your high horse.
11/30/09
Even so, it's hard for me to imagine any sort of circumstance where this kind of thing would be acceptable. At best, even if it is completely legally above-board, it's kind of a dick move.
11/30/09
"Get off your high horse"
The same could be said for you...
11/30/09
/laporte
What a bummer though, really.
11/30/09
haha neat tablet, and what a shame to see it die...
11/30/09
11/30/09
They would have had a great niche product here. Now, they're just going to have a ton of legal headaches.
11/30/09
11/30/09
I hate to say it but that was a fundamental flaw in TechCrunches thinking. It is and will be a Huge Business, Apple and others are chomping at the bit to get a device like this into the market, whoever does this first (and well) will reap big $$$.
And this is why is sounds like TechCrunch fell prey to predatory investors. Those bastards have no soul when it comes to ideas, it all about profit.
It sounds like TechCrunch could have used a good Patent Attorney along time ago.
/sadface
11/30/09
11/30/09
11/30/09
11/30/09
11/30/09
OK...unless it is really cool and cost $100. Then all principles are put on hold for the want of cool tech gear.
Christ, we interns are so easily corrupted.
11/30/09
11/30/09
11/30/09
06/15/09
06/15/09
06/15/09
06/15/09
yeah, people need to get paid, but if there's no contract saying "We'll pay your for X", then don't expect compensation.
06/15/09
If they were soliciting work from complete unknowns, that would make sense, but they are trying this on experienced artists who've done global campaigns for major multinational corporations. It's insulting, and shows how ignorant Google can be when it comes to anything other than coding.
I think everyone missed the point of the article.
06/15/09