The Joo Joo Delay And A Summary Of The Legal Wrangle With TechCrunch

The latest news is that Fusion Garage’s Joo Joo has revamped its interface, and that though pre-ordered Joo Joos were supposed to be shipped by end Feb, a manufacturing delay means the device will only be shipped in two weeks time on 25th March.

Manufacturing Issue Causes Delay

The delay comes by way of a manufacturing issue discovered mid–way during the production with regards to the 12.1 inch capacitive touch screen, which is an industry first. From what is known, it seems like screen was not as sensitive as hoped to be and more fine – tuning had been required.

With the previous announcement of the Fusion Garage deal with Malaysian company, CSL, all manufacturing costs associated with the Joo Joo has been eliminated from Fusion Garage’s care. As such, Fusion Garage assures all potential customers that the company will have “no other barriers in the way of product delivery in the new timeframe”. (Cheers to that!)

Bite-Sized Summary of the Lawsuit Between Fusion Garage and TechCrunch

Despite the tidal wave of positivity that Fusion Garage seems to be currently riding on, the lawsuit filed by TechCrunch in December last year, looms like a bad cloud over their heads. With Fusion Garage’s Motion to Dismiss Lawsuit scheduled to be heard on the 5th of April 2010, here’s a quick summary of the legal wrangle before the jury arrives.

Lawsuit filed by TechCrunch

i. False advertising in violation of the Lanham act

TechCrunch’s rather questionable strongest claim ssentially accuses Fusion Garage of making misleading statements during its advertising and promotion of the Joo Joo. Moreover, it alleges that these falsehoods are damaging to TechCrunch and will continue to harm its reputation unless halted by court injunction.

ii. Breach of fiduciary duty

A breach of fiduciary duty takes place when both parties acted in such a manner so as to define their relationship as being “partners” in the business.

TechCrunch maintains that the dealings between both sides were sufficient enough to deem that a partnership has existed between the 2 companies. As such, Fusion Garage had a duty of loyalty to TechCrunch. Fusion Garage, however, violated fiduciary duty when it concealed important facts, made misrepresentations, and individualized the joint intellectual property.