Nabi Tablet maker Fuhu suing Toys R Us for stealing "trade secrets" used on Tabeo tablet
0. phoneArena 24 Sep 2012, 23:14 posted on
Fuhu, the maker of children's tablet Nabi, is suing Toys R Us claiming that the toy retailer stole "trade secrets" which they used to release the Tabeo, a new tablet designed for the kiddies; Fuhu clasimss that Toys R Us used information it gleaned from them to launch the Tabeo...
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
13. ZEUS.the.thunder.god (unregistered)
thank Apple for showing others the way.
2. wendygarett (unregistered)
Is this site phonearena?
I'm tired to listen all these lawsuits....
10. ajac09 (Posts: 1367; Member since: 30 Sep 2009)
they think its major news.. they are idiots. But its coming from a website that gives you a warning becasuse you say something wont sell yet they let others attack each other and dont seem to care.
3. VZWuser76 (Posts: 1586; Member since: 04 Mar 2010)
Where are all the guys saying they stand behind Fuhu for fighting for their ip rights, or does that only apply to apple. This is the precedent being sent by these lawsuits. Now anytime someone comes out with a competing product, someone will probably get sued. Tell me again how this will stimulate innovation?
I'd bet this has less to do with trade secrets and more to do with Toys'R'Us wanting more money in their pockets, and they get that by manufacturing it themselves. Sound familiar?
9. dvdmon (Posts: 3; Member since: 25 Sep 2012)
I think you are right in that the Apple lawsuit has made everyone think immediately that anyone suing another tech company it's just about copying patents or trade dress.
If you actually look at the details of this case,it's very different. Fuhu is tiny compared to Toys R Us. They gave them exclusive rights to sell their product (obviously a mistake) and allegedly TRU only ordered small quantities. We got one when it first came out in December and I actually got the last one in the store. I remember people on the Nabi Facebook page clamoring for months about when they were going to be back in stock either online or at their local TRU, Fuhu finally got tired of this, ditched TRU, and went with several respectable retailers (Amazon, Best Buy, Walmart, Target, and Gamestop) for their follow-up tablet in August, and one month later what happens? TRU comes out with their own tablet with some curious similarities to the original Nabi. The case is just one thing, but the specs of the Tabeo are almost the same as the original Nabi.
I'm sorry, but to me (and obviously to Fuhu), this smells! Could it be that TRU realized they could learn a lot from having an exclusive deal from Fuhu to help them build their own tablet, and at the same time control sales so much that they basically squashed any real momentum or success for the company, thus making them a non-player when they finally came out with their tablet?
Remember, this is not just about copying, Fuhu is suing them on a number of accounts, including fraud and breach of contract. Not everything is comprable to the big case we just saw with Apple and Samsung. The world is more complicated and companies and situations are different. Please read and research what this particular case talks about before blindly just saying it's about X or Y!
14. VZWuser76 (Posts: 1586; Member since: 04 Mar 2010)
And what about what you are doing? Fuhu is accusing them of fraud and breach of contract, but at this point it's an accusation only. Where does it say how many units TRU had to buy? It says that they bought enough for the holiday season, so that probably was enough to legally satisfy their contract.
The whole point of my post was you don't see all the usual people who say blindly stand behind company x here defending this in the same manner.
16. dvdmon (Posts: 3; Member since: 25 Sep 2012)
Sorry, I meant to comment on the thread in general not specifically to your post. You're right we don't know the details of their agreement, however it sounds from the suit like Toys R Us had potential to sell 20K units per day, at least, but in the end only agreed to sell 20K units for the entire season. At least that's the claim that Fuhu is making.
My argument is only that people see the part about "copying" and equate it to Apple vs. Samsung because that was about copying and it was also about two hardware manufacturers. So there's a bit of a similarity but I believe it's only on the surface. It should be a very interesting case to watch, in any case!
4. OptimusOne (Posts: 694; Member since: 22 May 2012)
i want a tegra3 tablet for 200 :(
i just need play store...
6. Ragnarockd (Posts: 47; Member since: 27 Aug 2012)
suing has become an contagious disease or what...
8. CX3NT3_713 (Posts: 1957; Member since: 18 Apr 2011)
Great for hacking,,, just needs ext sdcard
15. downphoenix (Posts: 2358; Member since: 19 Jun 2010)
The Nabi2 actually has SD Card slot. If you want a cheap Tegra 3 tablet with an SD card slot, not a bad one to go with.
17. dvdmon (Posts: 3; Member since: 25 Sep 2012)
From what I have heard Fuhu mentions the bumper case and preinstalled apps. The preinstalled apps I think is a lot weaker than the bumber. The bumper on the Tabeo, while a different color, is very similar in shape to the Nabi's "butterfly" design - basically flared corners. The Tabeo, from what people have noticed from the specs and appearance, seems to be a rebranded Archcos Childpad, and one way they rebranded it was by adding a bumper very similar to the Nabi's.
Aside from those two features, there might be a lot of other small details that haven't come out quite yet. Remember that the Nabi was the first tablet specifically designed for kids, with a "kids mode" and a parent mode, parental controls, etc. Some of this stuff is somewhat obvious, but a lot not.
To me this just smacks totally of conflict of interest, if you believe that TRU had plans all along to come out with the Tabeo. If they didn't, then essentially they created a tablet from scratch in the 8 months between the time that they ended their agreement with Fuhu and unveiled the Tabeo. That's damn good for any company, let alone one with NO experience creating devices, wouldn't you say?
12. ibap (Posts: 701; Member since: 09 Sep 2009)
A trade secret is something that is not patented, but closely held within a company. Something like that stupid bean commercial with the dog. Unless they found an employee that talked, or TRU broke into their facility, they can't have stolen a trade secret.
That doesn't mean that TRU handled the initial agreement in good faith, and they might have a basis for a lawsuit over that. But "trade secret"? I don't think so. And that also means that Fuhu was not smart about their agreement with TRU in the first place.