Classic & Vintage - Specialized bicycle components suing two former employees

A lawsuit between Morgan Hill-based Specialized Bicycle Components and
two of its former employees is ready to go to trial this week in Santa Clara County
Superior Court.

Specialized says Robert Choi and Barley Forsman stole the design for their
signature bike when they left Specialized to form their own company called
Volagi last year.

Choi and Forsman say they did not steal any designs from their former employer.

They further claim Specialized is bitter about the pair's success, and that the
large high-end bike maker is trying to squash the smaller company.

Jury selections in the trial is set to begin today.

http://kliv.com/Specialized-Bicycle-Components-suing-two-former-em/11891505

Thoughts ?? I know from experience that Specialized can be
"difficult" as a corporate entity to work with.:D

From speaking to my LBS Specialized can come down pretty heavy on a shop if they want to have any other brands in the shop. I could say I'm not surprised by the move - but, then, I don't know much about the case.

This is futile without knowing the specifics of Specialized claims.

Agreed, T-Mar.

This doesn't even belong in C&V.

-Kurt

Unless they are referring to the mythical 3Rensho Specialized... :D

Didn't specialized just take an early Ritchey designed bike and send it off to Japan to get them to make mass produced copies? Pretty sure that's how the Stumpjumper came about.

Kind of ironic if so.

Everyone should hate Specialized and send me their higher-end frames to destroy.
54cm - 58cm

Everyone should hate Specialized and send me their higher-end frames to destroy.
54cm - 58cm

Ironically enough, all the bikes I've been fixing for the neighbors in recent months have been knackered 90's-era Specialized MTB's.

-Kurt

Why should the tech industry have all the fun with lawsuits?

Didn't specialized just take an early Ritchey designed bike and send it off to Japan to get them to make mass produced copies? Pretty sure that's how the Stumpjumper came about.

Kind of ironic if so.I was about to say the same thing. As the story goes...Gary Fisher gave friend Mike Sinyard one of their "Mountain Bikes" which used a Ritchey frame. Sinyard took that frame to Japan and had a copy made of it calling it the Stumpjumper. Sinyard makes bank and calls it globalization and that he's simply opening the doors to everyone to the mountain bike scene. That guy can burn in my book. I will never own a Specialized bike or allow anyone in my family to ride one.

Yeah, right. Like Specialized never copied anyone else's idea.

Hmm, is not the Volagi with the disc brakes in this month's Bicycling?

Hmm, jury trial, always a crap shoot.

The underdog is always a jury favorite, but judges often sway the outcome.

yup

Maybe Mr Sinyard is channeling Ignaz Schwinn?
He should look around and see what history does to those who want it all.

Agreed, T-Mar.

This doesn't even belong in C&V.

-Kurt

How would you categorize it ?

Certainly Specialized has been around a looong time. Their bikes
show up here regularly, don't they ?

The issues of designs, and borrowing of them in bikeworld go back
in history to time immemorial.

I'm working on digging up the claim specifics, because i'm curious.

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio......."

i'm pretty glad that the responses so far have been against specialized, because i feel the same way about their corporate domination in the bike scene. then again, i think the C and V crowd run against the grain and if this were in the road section there would be completely different responses.

imo the Volagi doesn't look at all like any specialized rig and def think spesh is playing the role of the dominating corporate gorilla

Reminds me of Barbie Vs Brats, 2 billion dollars and 10 years in court. End result, nothing but lawyers fees.

all ideas are 'stolen'. everyone did it before you.

i read techdirt a lot.

Yeah, right. Like Specialized never copied anyone else's idea.

Companies with questionable business practices are often the quickest to sue others for the same practice - IMO

End result, nothing but lawyers fees.

And the much smaller, start-up company more than likely out of business because of it.

I have no idea what the result of the lawsuit will be, but I'm very interested in it.

well rumor has it the some of the earliest Indenpendant Fanrications bikes were built for tubing aquired in an odd way. so not only were the IF staff using the knowledge they aquired at Fat Chance there were actually using (allegedly) Fat Chance tubes.

if these two guys left Specialized and started having their own carbon bikes laid up I have no doubt their bikes have some Specialized influence. proving they stole the design for bikes mass produced in chaina for both companies sound dumb to me

http://www.bicycleretailer.com/downloads/blogs/steve/volagipatent.jpg
Robert Choi and Barley Forsman left Specialized in April 2010 and launched Volagi at the Interbike show in Las Vegas in September that year. The Volagi line features carbon road bikes with disc brakes and distinctive “long-bow” seatstays designed to absorb road shock. Specialized filed suit against the company in October that year.

The pair recently received a design patent on the seatstay design.

After several preliminary hearings and three requests for preliminary injunction, the case will finally go to trial this week, Choi told Bicycle Retailer.

“I can't believe it got this far,” said Choi. “We didn't do anything wrong, we didn't steal anything,” Choi said.

Choi said he and Forsman developed the Volagi bikes on their own time and that neither were involved with bike design at Specialized. Choi and Forsman, who also worked together at CamelBak before joining Specialized, have about 40 patents between them, including patents used on products sold by CamelBak and Easton-Bell. Choi's first patent was for the VistaLite blinking LED taillight.

A Specialized's spokesman said the company does not comment on on-going litigation.
http://www.bicycleretailer.com/news/newsDetail/6331.html



Also, look here for some insight:


Specialized Bicycle Components, one of the nation's most prolific and well-known
makers of high-performance bikes, filed the lawsuit last year, alleging that Choi and Forsman
stole the design for their bike before leaving the South County-based company in 2010.

They say Volagi and its signature bike, the "Liscio," is based on Specialized's trade secrets.

Choi and Forsman deny stealing any designs from Specialized, maintaining that their former
employer is simply bitter because the pair have developed a unique product that's drawing
raves in the biking world. The partners view the lawsuit as an attempt by a powerful company
and its well-paid lawyers to wipe out a small competitor.

"They were embarrassed," said Forsman, 41. "A lot of this came down to appearance."

Added Choi, 50: "We thought we had a better idea. And in order for us to pursue it, we
were going to have to quit Specialized. For them to pursue this is an incredible surprise."

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_19662131

3alarmer, thanks for posting this. It will be interesting to see the outcome of the lawsuit.

Patent online at http://www.google.com/patents?id=mtDbAQAAEBAJ&printsec=abstract&zoom=4#v=onepage&q&f=false

So what is different about this frame that it deserves a patent....says the guy who has never ridden carbon. And probably never will.

So what is different about this frame that it deserves a patent....says the guy who has never ridden carbon. And probably never will.

The seat stays bypass the seat tube and terminate at the top tube. The longer seat stays may change the shock absorption of the rear triangle. It might also be a cleaner lay-up than the typical confluence of tubes at the typical top of the seat tube. I have looked at the Volagi web site before, the other intriguing feature of the bike is the use of disc brakes.
I have always missed the chance to go to one of the brand sponsored test ride events.
The bikes appear to have a taller head tube compared to a typical road bike. I would consider one., but not for the tall head tube, the brakes. Personally, I think the bigger hurdle for Volagi will be the flood of CX/road bikes coming with disc brakes soon now that the UCI finally is admitting in Discs in Cyclocross. e-richie, better tool up for those, I know you have discounted them in the past, but the word of the day and winning performance in the future is Brake Modulation.

Almost all companies have their design/engineering staff sign NDA's. Even if Specialized has no case, it will consume valuable attention from the smaller company not to mention money.

Reminds me of Barbie Vs Brats, 2 billion dollars and 10 years in court. End result, nothing but lawyers fees.

The model train world has had similar legal death matches. Of course, if you had a fight between a barbie and a brat, who would have the best chance?

Don't forget the inventor of the intermittent windshield wiper control... another decades long struggle.

So what is different about this frame that it deserves a patent...

Is this not a moot point if they have the patent in hand ?

Certainly, their patent may be open to challenge, but it was different
enough for some guy in the patent office to issue it, no?


Patent number: D637527
Filing date: Nov 9, 2010
Issue date: May 10, 2011
Application number: 29/378,786

The claim is for an "ornamental design" as shown and described.

I'm sure the marketing literature will digress into functional
attributes........but that's show biz.:D

Even if Specialized has no case, it will consume valuable attention from the smaller company not to mention money.

I believe we have a winner.......:thumb:

The seat stays bypass the seat tube and terminate at the top tube. The longer seat stays may change the shock absorption of the rear triangle. It might also be a cleaner lay-up than the typical confluence of tubes at the typical top of the seat tube.......

The bikes appear to have a taller head tube compared to a typical road bike........I think the bigger hurdle for Volagi will be the flood of CX/road bikes coming with disc brakes soon now that the UCI finally is admitting in Discs in Cyclocross........

You are right on with all of this, repechage.

I've test ridden a Volagi extensively, the frame geometry is spot on for the "endurance road bike" characteristics the bikes are touted for. The frame/fork is full high modulus carbon fiber, so they're light and responsive, and as a result they ride like a race bike in a lot of ways, too. And as you say, for the moment anyway, the disc brakes set them apart for this type of bike.

Choi and Forsman may have signed contracts stipulating that any inventions developed while employed at Specialized are the property of Specialized. In that context Specialized could imply that the design for the Volagi was stolen.

In the hi-tech world, these agreements are common but rarely enforced, especially if the invention is not directly pertinent to the former employer's business plans.

Why should the tech industry have all the fun with lawsuits?

+1 :thumb:

It is very difficult to speculate about IP cases without a good deal more information. Just from what little I have read here, it appears that this is not a patent case. Frankly, I have serious doubt that much that is major in the biking world is sufficiently novel and non obvious to be patentable. Of course, there are exceptions.

It appears to be a trade secret case, which, of course, would be tied to a confidentiality / non compete agreement. But, then, what is the secret? If it is design, once the design is made public, there is no more trade secret.

See what I mean?

I don't have any comments on the story because I think lawsuits are all silly, but I will say this is great publicity for Volagi. Specialized basically calling out the fact that Volagi is making a bike good enough for them to get all lawyered up about. Good looking bikes.

OK. As many know I am an IP lawyer with over 25 years in the field. I have been involved in similar issues going all the way back to law school. This is NOT a simple issue. Without the facts you cannot brand Specialized as an ogre trying to squash the little guy and cannot similarly label the two designers as thieves.

A great deal depends on their employment contracts, the scope of their responsibilities, the time line of the bikes development, what resources were used to produce the design, the disclosure (if any) made to Specialized while they were employed there, etc.

In general an engineer or designer's employment contract will dictate the scope of their employment. If either of them had developed a new for of cat litter while working at Specialized then there would be very little chance that Specialized could win a claim that they owned that concept. Here the product is exactly in Specialized area so that does not help the designers.

If the technology at issue fell with in the scope of the designer's responsibilities while they worked at Specialized, IF they developed the concept at Specialized facilities using Specialized's resources then Specialized has a strong case. If not then the case is weak. Bear in mind at my company, if an engineer develops something and we do not file a patent on it or make a product, here in the US the company still owns it.

You cannot simply compare the designer's bike to Specialized bikes to determine the issues here. If the article is correct this is a trade secret case. This means that the case involves concepts that are not patented, but Specialized CLAIMS as their secret propriety property.

It will be interesting to see what happens, but bear in mind that if this is a Trade Secret case, parts of the trial may never be made public.

http://forum.slowtwitch.com/gforum.cgi?post=3707306;

“I can't believe it got this far,” said Choi. “We didn't do anything wrong, we didn't steal anything,”

This make no sense to me. I am sure these seasoned veterans of the "biz" knew well in advance going into their employment this would be in their future. So much so that it reminds me of the recent Hansen/Rockart news items and sensing public fear, spec decides to "go nice".

Rather than crushing the boys, they end up supporting, then accidentally crushing them at some future point. Whatever is decided by spec group will become fact in this case and in all cases involving manufacturing bicycles on earth.

Is this not a moot point if they have the patent in hand ?

Certainly, their patent may be open to challenge, but it was different
enough for some guy in the patent office to issue it, no?



The claim is for an "ornamental design" as shown and described.

I'm sure the marketing literature will digress into functional
attributes........but that's show biz.:D

If it is only a "ornamental design" it is old art as GT as well as others had essentially the same design albeit they attached at the seat stay before going to the toptube.

3alarmer's post #35 is interesting and is probably the best summary at this point.

In my own non-lawyer mind, I doubt there would be a lawsuit if Volagi's two founders were not former employees of Specialized. So I have to wonder what the real issue is: Is it that the Volagi design is an infringement on Specialized's own design(s) and a case could be made for this whether Volagi's founders had any previous connection to Specialized or not.......Or is it that two individuals who worked at Specialized started their own company in the same industry as Specialized and will be a direct competitor to Specialized, Specialized doesn't like that they did that, and they're pursuing this primarily for that reason and that reason only.

Of course, it's probably some combination of the two issues that's prompted the lawsuit, with the latter issue I mentioned above being more important. Again, I doubt there would be a lawsuit at all if Volagi's founders did not previously work for Specialized. I imagine Specialized would have barely noticed Volagi on the radar screen if the two guys didn't have such an obvious connection to them.

Choi said he and Forsman developed the Volagi bikes on their own time and that neither were involved with bike design at Specialized.

Anybody know what they DID do at Specialized? Everything else I've read about them makes them sound like designers, or at least inventers.

Reminds me of Barbie Vs Brats, 2 billion dollars and 10 years in court. End result, nothing but lawyers fees.

Not quite. Also a good deal of negative press for Specialized.
Sure wish I'd read this thread before buying my Globe Live3 (Specialized apparently bought Globe and now has discontinued the Live3, so I can't get one for my dad and his dog), and my Stumpjumper last year. Both have been stupendous bikes, but I wasn't too crazy about buying Taiwan-made. Now I wish I'd been more patient and more educated before making my purchase. :(

I've been wondering if it was the case where a contract they'd signed meant everything bike-related they invented (no matter what time of day or location) during their employment belonged to Specialized (as is the case where I work minus the bike-related part), but now I'm wondering if they sketched it up, showed it to a superior who said Specialized wasn't interested in pursuing it and then thought they had free reign to make it on their own (thus saying they didn't steal anything) whereas Speciallized still considered it their property and is suddenly interested in pursuing it now that they're making money. Hate to come down on the side of the company against innovators when Speciallized is acting like such an ogre, but that does seem to make the most sense. Unless Specialized does feel innately threatened by them for some reason and just wants to crush them in legal fees before it ever goes to court. Either that or one of these dudes slept with the wife of the president of Specialized and now it's personal.

Actually, I think that's the hypothesis, I'm going with: Choi and/or Forsman slept with the wife/daughter/mother of a high level muckety muck at Spesh and now it's on. Wait a second. Anybody remember that dude who posted in Foo a year or so ago about sleeping with his boss and him thinking it was a one time thing and her thinking they were now a couple and then him never posting again? I wonder if he was either Choi or Forsman.

So what is different about this frame that it deserves a patent....says the guy who has never ridden carbon. And probably never will.

It's a "design patent", usually worthless. One good example of a successful design patent is 3M post-its, 3M patented a range of stickness for the adhesive. One example of a bad design patent is Klein's oversized aluminum tubing patent, easily designed around (bad patent lawyer).

Listening to the defendant's statements it's clear they are going for the "little guy getting crushed" defense, usually works because judges and juries are not educated in the field of study related to the patent.

all ideas are 'stolen'. everyone did it before you.

i read techdirt a lot.

Exactly. It even says so in the bible (if you're of the religious inclination):


ECC 1:10 Is there [any] thing whereof it may be said, See, this [is] new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us.

Ya see? ;)

Reminds me of Barbie Vs Brats, 2 billion dollars and 10 years in court. End result, nothing but lawyers fees.

You say that like it's a bad thing . . . . ;)

AHA:

Choi and Forsman were in the equipment department at Specialized until April 2010. “I managed their equipment, the bottle business and such. Cages, pumps, computers, tires; completely separated from the bikes. Barney was the primary designer for equipment,” Choi explained during a short break in proceedings on Tuesday.

Unless Specialized does feel innately threatened by them for some reason and just wants to crush them in legal fees before it ever goes to court. Either that or one of these dudes slept with the wife of the president of Specialized and now it's personal.

Actually, I think that's the hypothesis, I'm going with: Choi and/or Forsman slept with the wife/daughter/mother of a high level muckety muck at Spesh and now it's on. .:D

Cases filed matching "Specialized Bicycle Components, Inc."

http://dockets.justia.com/search?q=Specialized+Bicycle+Components%2C+Inc.

:twitchy:

http://www.facebook.com/volagi/posts/355322411151386
Facebook page with their side of teh story.

I just hate the fact that Specialized can wound them so bad financially it wont matter whos right.

Reminds me of Barbie Vs Brats, 2 billion dollars and 10 years in court. End result, nothing but lawyers fees.And therein lies the rub.

Tremendous drain on our economy, productivity, and purchasing power.

Respectfully, the most important thing separating this country from dictatorship or corporate oligarchy is access to the courts and due process. All systems have down sides, but the alternatives are no better - Europeans are regularly screwed because of unjust decisions, less court access and lower insurance reqs. The reality is that no one on this thread actually understands what this case is about or what the issues are. The devil is in the details.