Northern California - Volagi Liscio vs. Specialized Roubaix lawsuite

Anyone ride a Volagi Liscio?

http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_19662131

I like the disc brakes.

I wonder how much of it comes down to what they thought up and designed while working for Specialized. I know that as a biological scientist, everywhere I've worked so far (university, hospital, private institutions), I've had to sign away the rights to any potential intellectual property I might produce while employed by them (no matter whether or not it was conceived during "working hours"-they're all working hours when you're on salary-or on their property. Since they want the guys to hand over their patents rather than challenging the validity of the patents, my guess is it's something along those lines. Still, if Speciallized is not putting out disc braked road bikes, it seems as though it's a different market.

I wonder how much of it comes down to what they thought up and designed while working for Specialized.

I don't believe there are any trade secrets - what could they be? Carbon fiber layup details? Magical Zertz materials? Seems like corporate bullying to me.

Specialized got their big break when they stole Gary Fisher and Tom Ritchie's design for the mountain bike, then had it mass produced for less in Asia. Now they are suing their own employees? I hope they lose this one.

I wonder if Specialized is going to claim that the Volagi was designed while they were employees of the company, and therefore Specialized owns the design?

I wonder if Specialized is going to claim that the Volagi was designed while they were employees of the company, and therefore Specialized owns the design?

I would bet on that. If they can prove the 2 designers worked on some of the designs while under Specialized employment then their work will be considered a company property even if the company tanked the ideas and did not convert them into marketed products.

Oops, I didn't see that I accidentally restated himespau's post.

As I selfishly read this, I am trying to imagine some, perhaps unlikely, series of events where, due to unprecedented legal maneuverings, one of these bikes ends up in my hands as part of a test case/class action or post-trial dumpster diving excursion (where I bravely rescue bikes that are slated to be destroyed.)

For the record, I'd prefer the black and white one over the red, or all black, tough I wouldn't turn down either.

http://volagi.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/main_bike_image/Venga%20SL-Side-edited-cropped.jpg

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php/790208-Specialized-bicycle-components-suing-two-former-employees

As I selfishly read this, I am trying to imagine some, perhaps unlikely, series of events where, due to unprecedented legal maneuverings, one of these bikes ends up in my hands as part of a test case/class action or post-trial dumpster diving excursion (where I bravely rescue bikes that are slated to be destroyed.)

For the record, I'd prefer the black and white one over the red, or all black, tough I wouldn't turn down either.


Curtis, you and Robocheme should team up and do a TV show.

As I selfishly read this, I am trying to imagine some, perhaps unlikely, series of events where, due to unprecedented legal maneuverings, one of these bikes ends up in my hands as part of a test case/class action or post-trial dumpster diving excursion (where I bravely rescue bikes that are slated to be destroyed.)

For the record, I'd prefer the black and white one over the red, or all black, tough I wouldn't turn down either.

http://volagi.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/main_bike_image/Venga%20SL-Side-edited-cropped.jpg

If your dumpster diving yields two, feel free to send one my way.

Blech, disk brakes on a road bike.

Blech, disk brakes on a road bike.
Your comment has been noted, and depending on which way the future lands, you will be praised or ridiculed. Please check back in three years.

http://www.facebook.com/volagi/posts/355322411151386
Their facebook page with their story on all this.

http://www.facebook.com/volagi/posts/355322411151386
Their facebook page with their story on all this.

Thanks for the link

http://www.facebook.com/volagi/posts/355322411151386
Their facebook page with their story on all this.

As a cyclist and a human, I was very interested to read this.

As a lawyer, I sure hope they ran this by their trial counsel before they posted it, as there appears to be some things in it that Specialized's clawyers can make hay with. I'm guessing there is nothing in it that hadn't already come out in the pre-trial discovery process, but still, there are some statements in the Facebook post that sound like admissions to me. Assuming everything in the Facebook post is 100% accurate - and I have no reason to think otherwise - I would say that (1) the Volagi guys are on the side of the angels, morally, and (2) they may still be screwed, legally. (Disclaimer: I know just enough about the pertinent law to be dangerous, and I have absolutely no connection whatsoever to this case, so I may be 100% wrong here.)

There is a life lesson here for everyone. If you are ever unfortunate enough to be in a civil lawsuit, don't say anything about it anyone - and I mean anyone - without clearing it with your lawyer first. Seriously. Unless you are a lawyer familiar with the case, you have no clue how what you say might come back to bite you in the @$$. I have seen Facebook posts do serious damage to an otherwise solid case. So, if you are in a lawsuit, on either side, keep your mouth shut. Let your lawyer do the talking.

On the other hand, it is possible that Specialized may lose in the court of public opinion, and this may make them think twice about bullying a small company. One can always hope...

Your comment has been noted, and depending on which way the future lands, you will be praised or ridiculed. Please check back in three years.

:D

I really dig the idea of disc brakes on a quality road bike. I'm not headed to the Tour de Anything In Particular as a pro, and as an ameteurish type, I like disc brakes for a host of reasons.

Maybe Specialized will steal that idea. :p

interview with robert choi
http://www.bikerumor.com/2012/01/05/volagi-cofounder-robert-choi-speaks-about-specialized-lawsuit/#more-38592

interview with robert choi
http://www.bikerumor.com/2012/01/05/volagi-cofounder-robert-choi-speaks-about-specialized-lawsuit/#more-38592

Yeah, it does sound like Specialized is claiming they thought up the design while under contract to Specialized so they should own the patent. That's tough unless they have dated notebooks showing it was designed afterwards. IP in these areas can get messy. Sort of surprised they didn't have to sign some sort of non-compete.

Ok, I may be naive, but Specialized says the design is stolen from them. Well, last time I checked, there was no disc brake road bike. Disc brake on road bikes? Why not. Descending hundreds of miles on 25% grades do take its toll on normal brake pads. Plus, I like the idea of a bike designed for endurance rides (longer than 50 miles).

Interesting link. I agree with Himespau's take, I don't think this has anything to do with disk brakes. I work in a field where IP is a huge issue, and the two bolded parts below give me pause. To my layman's eye, it appears to confirm that Specialized are claiming that the Volagi designs originated while they were still employed by Specialized, subject to the conditions of their contracts that likely assigned all inventions to Specialized.

"Now the case isn’t really about us stealing their design, but about us breaching our contract for confidentiality, non-compete and invention assignment. Basically that we took their trade secrets. The suit claims that anything we created or thought of while we were in their employ, whether it was at work or on our own time, that the property was theirs. Because of this, they’re having a hard time coming up with damages. They’re claiming the Longbow seat stay design should be assigned to them and we should pay royalties on it to them.

The case really hinges on when we formulated our ideas. By the time we had really discussed a concept in any detail, we both agreed that we needed to quit and pursue it on our own."

The wording of the second part wouldn't make me feel confident. I can't imagine that "agreeing to need to quit" would cut it in court, as opposed to say, having actually quit, left the company, and having documented when the inventions were made.

One other thing that strikes me as odd - Specialized is going after these guys almost the minute they launch a product. They've not waited to see if they actually make any money from the design; from a business point of view that seems intriguing. As of today, I'm thinking Specialized is spending way more money pursuing this that they will make from any kind of royalty settlement.

Having said that, I wouldn't be surprised if the whole case doesn't boost sales anyway. You can't say that this has been bad PR for those guys.

Interesting and cognet observations, Beaker. You spotted what could well prove to be a major problem statement for the Volagi guys. There can be a world of difference between what one does before leaving and what one does after leaving.

As for why Specialized jumped on this so early and the cost-effectiveness of the suit, it appears that Specialized made the business decision to be very proactive about any issues that might have an impact on their intellectual property. Some companies do it that way, so not. Who's right? That is in the minds of the decision-makers of Specialized and the other companies.

I don't think this has anything to do with disc brakes either. What trade secrets and intellectual property could Specialized possibly have? Things like test results on how different carbon fiber materials and configurations respond to different kinds of loading, best ways to layup tricky joints, things like that. These two guys weren't bike designers but they maybe had access to that kind of info and the opportunity to steal it.

I don't think this has anything to do with disc brakes either. What trade secrets and intellectual property could Specialized possibly have? Things like test results on how different carbon fiber materials and configurations respond to different kinds of loading, best ways to layup tricky joints, things like that. These two guys weren't bike designers but they maybe had access to that kind of info and the opportunity to steal it.

I believe that the point is, they didn't steal pre-existing Specialized trade secrets, rather the Volagi bike was designed while Choi and Forsman were under contract with Specialized, and according to the terms of that contract, everything they designed (be it water bottles, gloves or bikes) was automatically owned by Specialized. So by producing and selling the Volagi bikes, they're making money from intellectual property that is owned by Specialized.

Not that I think that's a good thing, but that seems to be the way that the case is being played out. To my mind, the fact that Specialized is throwing money at this before they've really made much from the bike is showing that Specialized either hopes to drive them out of business or at the very least make sure that they get royalties and punitive damages. I think I read that they've sold 180 bikes, at say, $3K a pop - that makes a shade under $600K in sales. No idea how much profit that would translate to, but I read that Specialized has spent over a million* in getting the case moving already.

On the other hand, I feel as though Choi and Forsman may have acted with a fair degree of naivety in the timing of their actions too.

edit: apparently $1.5M according to this (http://www.bicycleretailer.com/news/newsDetail/6341.html)

According to some interviews Choi and Forsman have already spent a lot of dough to defend themselves, even selling their homes. I doubt they now have much resources to survive very long. The trial might actually be their last hope, if they win they can later sue the Big 'S' to recover their expenses in addition to punitive damages. Unfortunately Specialized might have already accomplished what they intended to do, such the marrow (cash) out of Volagi.

Specialized is bullying the industry on all fronts. It's not a first, Trek did it in its hey days when Lance was winning. Same strategy of limiting their dealers in the brands they can sell, in how space competing makers can occupy in the store... Both companies are strong enough to outspend all others bike companies in terms of sponsorship contracts. On one hand it pours a lot of cash into the sport, on the other hand it dilutes competition by making the super teams unbeatable.

I have nothing against Specialized per se, I actually think their products are excellent with innovative and quality designs. Their saddle line is impressive. On the other hand I despise the big corporation attitude. We are not talking Apple against Microsoft, or Samsung, or HTC here, it's really a case of David against Goliath. And David never intended to steal Goliath's fortune, from the start Volagi marketed their product to an infinitely minuscule market, the double centuries and brevet riders.

I believe that the point is, they didn't steal pre-existing Specialized trade secrets, rather the Volagi bike was designed while Choi and Forsman were under contract with Specialized, and according to the terms of that contract, everything they designed (be it water bottles, gloves or bikes) was automatically owned by Specialized. So by producing and selling the Volagi bikes, they're making money from intellectual property that is owned by Specialized.


This would hold if they designed their bikes during work hours or using company facilities. If they designed the bikes on their own time and using their own equipment, they have a good case (under California law) that they did nothing wrong. Specialized is likely trying to crush them with legal fees, whether or not they are in the right.

The two guys really have nothing to win from this case (besides a small amount of publicity) and they have everything to lose, including their life savings and years of their lives in which I expect they would prefer to be doing something else.

Specialized really has nothing to win either, except to teach a lesson to other potentially entrepreneurial employees. The bikes are really not that revolutionary. Lots of people have been talking about road bike disk brakes in recent years.

This whole case is a big game to Sinyard, but he is playing with other peoples' lives.

This would hold if they designed their bikes during work hours or using company facilities. If they designed the bikes on their own time and using their own equipment, they have a good case (under California law) that they did nothing wrong. Specialized is likely trying to crush them with legal fees, whether or not they are in the right.


I wouldn't assume that - it would also be hard to prove I would think. For me, the problem is between the Facebook posting and the bike rumor interview, it seems as though they have incriminated themselves somewhat. They acknowledge coming up with the idea (design?) for the bike while they were employees or at least, during their notice period (legally still employees I think). Truth in lending - I work in biotech/pharma and the clauses of employment contracts surrounding the assignment of inventions to my employer seem very similar. Of course, people do leave and start small companies after working for larger ones all the time, but in general you'd try to agree all this stuff up front to avoid *exactly* this kind of problem.

Your comment has been noted, and depending on which way the future lands, you will be praised or ridiculed. Please check back in three years.

Oh, I'll probably be ridiculed. The trend is always toward more complex components (electronic shifting, disk brakes). I'm not a big fan of brifters, either. :D

Oh, I'll probably be ridiculed. The trend is always toward more complex components (electronic shifting, disk brakes). I'm not a big fan of brifters, either. :D

I would agree that most new components are not necessary yet they enhanced the experience by adding convenience. On the other hand I would consider disk brakes as a welcomed added security. They work really nicely on a mountain bike and could add better, smoother, and more controlled braking on the road.

is this going drift into a fixed gears rule thread?:p

I'm not a big fan of brifters, either. :D

But what if we put a Yoohoo logo on them?

From Volagi's Facebook post:

Unfortunately, Specialized has requested for Judge Woodhouse to place us under a gag order (again) so the ability for Robert or Barley to speak with the press will be prevented until the gag order is lifted. However, it is a public case so if you happen to be in San Jose, you can catch the trial at the Santa Clara County Superior Court. 190 N. 1st Street, San Jose, Court Room #4.

But what if we put a Yoohoo logo on them?

Adjusting indexing for brifters is still a waste of time when full-friction bar-ends just work all the time.

The trial might actually be their last hope, if they win they can later sue the Big 'S' to recover their expenses in addition to punitive damages.

I don't know if Volagi filed a counterclaim against Specialized - I'm not sure what it would be for. If Volagi wins in court, they get to recover their "costs of suit," which is a carefully defined term of art that does not include their attorney fees unless either (1) Specialized's claim is based on a statute that allows for recovery of attorney fees or (2) Specialized's claim is based on a contract that provides for them. I have no idea if the employment contracts provided for attonrey fees, but I doubt there is an applicable statute.

From what little I know of this case (which is what has been presented and linked to in BF), I don't see how Volagi would have any kind of a "malicious prosecution" claim against Specialized. All Spedcialized needs is a good-faith basis for bringing their suit, and from what the Volagi guys said on Facebook and elsewhere, it sure sounds to me like Specialized can meet that standard easily. (It is actually very hard to mount a successful malicious prosecution against anyone who is represented by even a marginally competent counsel - the plaintiff does not have to be right, they just have to have a good-faith basis for thinking they have a case.)


Specialized really has nothing to win either, except to teach a lesson to other potentially entrepreneurial employees. The bikes are really not that revolutionary. Lots of people have been talking about road bike disk brakes in recent years.

That is exactly what Specialized has to win and is exactly what they are after. This is less about Volagi itself, and more about drawing a line in the sand for anyone coming behind them. It's called defending the brand. (My guess is also that neither side expected this suit to go so far - over 90% settle before trial - oh, and if the litigants thought it was expensive before, they are going to soil themselves when they see the bills for the trial.:eek:)

As for the bikes not being revolutionary, probably not in terms of the technology. What is closer to revolutionary is devoting top-drawer CF technology and design exclusively to the randonneur/distance market. That is the real loss to the industry if Volagi is driven out of business


I wouldn't assume that - it would also be hard to prove I would think.

Keep in mind that, in a trial, "Proof" consists of whatever convinces the jury or, if it is a bench trial, the judge. That includes believing one witness and not another with nothing to go on beyond hearing and seeing the two witnesses testify. Juries have to resolve "he said/she said" conflicts all the time. Throw out any and all scientific, mathematical or technical notions of "proof" you ever had - they do not apply here.

And in a civil trial, the standard of proof is a "preponderance of the evidence." Whazzat mean? It means "more likely than not." Imagine balancing a pencil on your finger. A "preponderance of the evidence" is enough to tip the pencil, even a little, one way or the other. Because Specialized is the plaintiff, they have the burden of proof, meaning they have the burden of making the pencil move their way. If the pencil remained perfectly evenly balanced, Specialized loses. But as you can see, the burden on Specialized is far, far less than the crinmnal "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard. (The difference isn the standards of proof between a criminal case and a civl one is why OJ Simpson could be acquitted of murder but held civilly liable for the deaths of Nicole Simpson and Ron Brown.)

Oh, I'll probably be ridiculed. The trend is always toward more complex components (electronic shifting, disk brakes). I'm not a big fan of brifters, either. :DDisc brakes really aren't much more complex, if you think about it. Caliper brakes are like really big disc brakes, where the wheel itself is the disc.

So long as you're not talking hydraulic disc brakes or any of that silliness.


is this going drift into a fixed gears rule thread?:pWho needs the extra complexity of sprockets and a chain? Just throw a big ol' wheel 'twixt your nethers and call it a day.

http://americanhistory.si.edu/onthemove/img/media/l/1362.jpg

Wait, actually, to hell with the back wheel, too. Unicycles, man!

I have a Volagi and have no regrets. Who knows, it may someday be worthy of putting in my will. I'm just an aged, can't-take-it-with-you geek, but the ride is excellent. While not up to the cushy standards of our steel tandem, it's light years ahead of my steel OCR1. And if your 200 lbs. like I am the disc brakes take most of the terror out of a steep, winding, ranch-road descent (ranch road = really , really bad road). I can brake with two fingers and there is absolutely no fade. I'm even wishing I had a disc on the front our of tandem (we have one on the rear).

I hope Volagi prevails in the sense of survival. Volagi has put together what may be the first lightweight CF, disc brake bike and I would hate to see them fall by the wayside only to have the general concept mainstreamed by the big boys.

Some of their actions, either by timing or nature, may have been ill-advised or constituted some form of contract violation, but it's a bit distressing to contemplate an employment contract that essentially owns an employee 24/7. What if Joe and Charlie leave a company making widgets and start a better widget company. Assuming no IP was stolen, the work was not performed on company time or use company assets (or trade secrets) does the first company assert some right because Joe and Charlie got smarter in their employ? (ignoring executive-level no-compete clauses, etc.). Ain't servitude grand?