[dmix]

Summary of the evidence presented in the complaint:

1) Using the same proprietary font in their logo was a really dumb idea:

> https://i.imgur.com/7pYZ8bp.png

2) Alleges he engaged in internal meetings "outside the scope of his work at Magic Leap" in order to gain useful information, while simultaneously neglecting his duties at work as he planned to start his own company in China. Before launching a product that looks and functions very similar to the Magic Leap product within a 2yr timespan (quitting in mid-2016, started in 2017, launched in 2019) while Magic Leap has been at it since 2010.

3) Their primary evidence seems to be some useless "Private Information" confidentiality form we all sign

4) The other is some Youtube interview the Nreal founder did where he openly admitted to being inspired by his work at Magic Leap:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcPB4POYkpc

Where he basically said that Magic Leap was being too ambitious with an "impossible" goal of trying to put it all in one small device... and he wanted to utilize Chinese manufacturing pipelines to build the same thing but much simpler by utilizing existing smartphone and laptop tech.

5) Finally another section compared demos by both companies, both involving whales:

Magic Leap's whale demos:

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LM0T6hLH15k

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PyCoTzRzHxo

Nreal's twitter picture demo:

> https://i.imgur.com/jPIGMkf.png

That's about it. Points 2) and 3) get repeated ad-nauseam and not very convincingly IMO.

[khuey]

The meat of the complaint IMO is paragraph 22.

> The resulting product, as demonstrated at CES and on publicly available videos, bears a striking similarity to the Confidential Designs that Magic Leap had under development before and during the time that Mr. Xu worked at Magic Leap, but which were not ultimately commercialized or publicly released.

[usaphp]

> Using the exact same proprietary font in their logo was a really dumb idea

It’s not the same font. Similar but not the same. Look at letter L and A. They are different

[dmix]

"e" and "a" are the same but the "L" by Nreal is custom. Additionally the "n" in Nreal looks like half of the "m" in Magic.

Only the "Nreal" part is using the font FYI and only 3 letters directly overlap (e, a, l).

Magic Leaps offers a similar font LominoUI on their site but it isn't entirely the same as the logo font:

https://creator.magicleap.com/learn/guides/design-typography

[usaphp]

A is not the same. It looks similar but the cut on the bottom has different angle. Also looking at it closer, even E is not the same. In magic leap the top cutout is bigger than bottom one, in nreal they have the same, equal size.

[dmix]

Oh come on, that logo type is extremely derivative of the Magic Leap one. n/m e, and a were essentially copied. They don't have to be exact copies to be stolen.

I'm very pro-theft in design as a learning and inspiration tool but it's extremely stupid when you both copy the logo font while also doing similar IP, when the cofounder worked there previously. It makes it look like they were baiting Magic Leap to complain. Even if the initial complaint is overall quite weak and the whole thing is probably futile.

[Lazare]

> They don't have to be exact copies to be stolen.

A font would be covered under copyright so....I mean....legally, they do have to be exact copies, yes. And this one is not, so the entire discussion of the font seem legally irrelevant.

[dmix]

But it's certainly not helping. It amplifies the derivative nature of the whole operation, right from the branding level to the product, regardless of exact legal implications.

This stuff matters in personal legacy, industry/media respect, and ultimately branding too. Unless they were purposefully going for the Chinese knock-off look.

[bflesch]

Why on earth does a pre-revenue startup need a proprietary font design?

[mondoshawan]

I asked this very same question while I was there during its development. The answer was "its a badge of honor". Ugh.

[gamblor956]

This is a complaint...it's the first step in a very long process of litigation.

In order to get to the next stage of litigation, it needs to allege just enough facts to make a "prima facie" showing (i.e., that it establishes at least some evidence of each claim).

If it makes that hurdle, the case proceeds to discovery, which is where both sides turn over documents, depose witnesses, etc., to determine the actual IP stolen (if any).

TLDR: it doesn't matter if the complaint is convincing. It's just the first step.