Download the Tom's Hardware App from the App Store
The reference for current tech news
Yes No

CrunchPad Tablet Killed by 'Greed and Jealousy'

by - source: Tom's Hardware US

Michael Arrington's CrunchPad is officially dead.

Last January we wrote about TechCrunch's CrunchPad tablet. We were excited by the prototype and Michael Arrington's goal to build a low cost touch screen web tablet that booted right to the browser. Unfortunately, just days before the device's launch, things went pear-shaped and Arrington today announced that the project was dead, declaring, "The entire project self destructed over nothing more than greed, jealousy and miscommunication."

Arrington wrote that two weeks ago TechCrunch and its partner Fusion Garage were gearing up to launch the CrunchPad. However, on November 17, just three days before the launch date, Fusion Garage CEO Chandra Rathakrishnan emailed Arrington and said FG would be launching the CrunchPad alone, without the TechCrunch crew.

"On November 17, our deadline date for greenlighting the debut three days later, the CEO of our partner on the project, Chandra Rathakrishnan, sent me an email with the subject “no good news.” … Bizarrely, we were being notified that we were no longer involved with the project. Our project. Chandra said that based on pressure from his shareholders he had decided to move forward and sell the device directly through Fusion Garage, without our involvement.

Err, what? This is the equivalent of Foxconn, who build the iPhone, notifiying Apple a couple of days before launch that they’d be moving ahead and selling the iPhone directly without any involvement from Apple.

Chandra also forwarded an internal email from one of his shareholders. My favorite part of the email: “We still acknowledge that Arrington and TechCrunch bring some value to your business endeavor…If he agrees to our terms, we would have Arrington assume the role of visionary/evangelist/marketing head and Fusion Garage would acquire the rights to use the Crunchpad brand and name. Personally, I don’t think the name is all that important but you seem to be somewhat attached to the name.”

And with that, the entire project self destructed."

Arrington goes on to allege theft of intellectual property and says he will be filing multiple lawsuits against Fusion Garage, and possibly Chandra and his shareholders as individuals, shortly.

Chandra's side of things is likely to come out soon so we'll update once he speaks. For now, we're incredibly disappointed the project has fallen apart. You can read the full story here.

Share:
7
Comments
X
Submit

Comments
Add your comment
dopeydog 30/11/2009 23:39
Hide
-0+

Fail

strangestranger 30/11/2009 23:47
Hide
-2+

I have no idea what that thing is butsomething about that cannot be right, you cannot just tell someone they are no longer involved with their own product.

LePhuronn 01/12/2009 01:22
Hide
-2+

Well, this will depend on who owns the development rights to it - it's not uncommon for investors to work in some kind of ownership bullshit as part of funding agreements to pull just this sort of thing.

mi1ez 01/12/2009 09:46
Hide
-2+

Need to be careful what you're signing these days - some people are just scum.

ukgooey 01/12/2009 11:27
Hide
-1+

What a fucking rip off. I hate these corporate dicks. They're just trying to find legal ways to steal and that makes them worse than a mugger by my reckoning. I hope the project falls down. Wankers.

swamprat 01/12/2009 13:34
Hide
--2+

ukgooey :
I hate these corporate... They're just trying to find legal ways to steal and that makes them worse than a mugger by my reckoning. I hope the project falls down


Where are the people that post in any piracy related article to say that you can't steal IP etc?

There did seem to be a mention in the quoted email that there were terms and an offer - so maybe we're not seeing the full picture here, did Arrington 'accidentally' sell out as part of the "miscommunication"? They'd have been a bit daft to sign something that would let their business partner gain sole rights to their product without further agreement/payment.
The shareholders would need to have been fairly cheeky to get the corporate veil lifted on them (if the relevant law is similar to England and Wales law).

ukgooey 02/12/2009 01:28
Hide
-0+

swamprat :
Where are the people that post in any piracy related article to say that you can't steal IP etc?


No comparison.

Hypothetical scenario 1:

I go and see every Harry Potter film (with guest) including coke/popcorn/various crap at a cost of around £150+. I also somehow manage to purchase two of the films on DVD, although I'm not sure how. J.K.Rowling gets her 25p and UGC get a lot more despite getting sweet popcorn mixed in with my salted popcorn (both with the consistency and taste of polystyrene). The rest of the money goes to "some corporate dicks". I then pirate copies of the movies so I can at least remind myself what happened in the last one before I see the next one, not that I really care. Everyone is a winner, except me cos my missus keeps making me watch films I couldn't give a toss about.

Hypothetical scenario 2:

I steal J.K. Rowling's idea as my own and make millions and billions whilst she continues to live in squalor. I drive past in my Ferrari 430 and give her the finger.

Like I said. Not the same.

However, I do think you mean well so all is not lost.

Best offers

Newsletters


OK