Meridian Unplugged - Powered by MrTechGuy.co.uk Forums Discussion HiFi & HT Chat The Philosophy of Tweaking Equipment

Had a coffee today with our lawyer - not an IP specialist but some experience of IP litigation.

Now this is 1 lawyers view - remember 10 lawyers = 11 differing views.

Usually IP "theft" is taking something from one company and using with another - not the case here. Using IP from one product in a Companies portfolio with another product is much less common and as result case law is pretty weak. The argument ususally comes down to was their actual loss (monetary or reputaional) to the Company and any gain on the part of the other party as a result of this activity. Sometimes it also takes the view of a "casual observer" to the situation rather than a person familiar with every detail.

So would a causal observer be minded to view that owners of "older" products were dissuaded from purchasing "newer" products as a result of this "enhancement", could it be demonstrated the main reason someone was now not choosing to upgrade a 5+ year old product was as the result of this activity.
Reputation damage is a difficult one to call, but given updates had been promised by the Company and not at that time delivered, it could be argued that the activity was an embarasement.

As to gain on the part of the other party - with the original update this is purely reputational. However with the subsequent activity even if this is new developed code - could this have been achieved without the knowledge gained in the first activity. By charging for it then the activity moves to a new level and one that litigation against is likely to favour the Company.

In summary - a casual observer is likely to view the first activity as a so what, but the second activity as being a violation of the companies IP rights.

This is interesting as a few on here have argued that it is the first activity that they find most difficult to accept and that the "home grown filter" is "ok". Now the view here, as I say, is 1 lawyer, based on a quick coffee conversation and assuming the second activity is as a result of knowledge gained through the first.