In the News: Left, Right Left (thoughts on Tinder v. Bumble Lawsuit)

Media Mention
IPPro

In an article published in April 2018 edition of IPPro Patents, David Kurtz discussed the impending lawsuit between dating apps Match Group (Tinder’s parent company) and Bumble claiming patent infringement and trade secret misappropriation from two former Tinder executives, Chris Gulczynski and Sarah Mick, who now work at Bumble. However, Bumble claims that the suit is “baseless” based on the two companies’ previous history.

Match has a “compelling story that, at a minimum, Gulczynski and Mick misappropriated trade secrets and brought them to Bumble where they were ultimately developed. If Match can present evidence supporting its claims, and Bumble does not have a strong counter argument, then Match is certainly right to make this a trade secrets case,” explained Kurtz.

However, if Match’s lawsuit is found to have been made in bad faith, there could be negative repercussions for the company. “In other words, if the court finds that the claim of misappropriation was made in bad faith, Match could be responsible for paying Bumble’s legal fees,” noted Kurtz. “In the world of litigation, there’s almost nothing worse than filing a claim against another party, and not only losing, but paying the fees of the entity you sued.”

The fact that the two executives in question and Bumble’s CEO were previously employed at Tinder could significantly help Match’s case. “Certainly, it’s a plus for Match, compared with alleging such wrongdoing against a competitor lacking any of their former employees,” said Kurtz. On the other hand, an obvious weakness for Match is that it waited awhile to file its case. “The fact that Match waited so long to file its case is a ‘nonlegal’ factor that calls into question the basis for filing the lawsuit, and may add a heavy dose of skepticism on the part of the court and, if the case gets that far, a jury.”

To view the full article, please click here and jump to page 12:

http://www.ippropatents.com/ippropatents/IPProPatents_issue_053.pdf

Subscribe for Updates

Related Attorneys

Jump to Page

Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP Cookie Preference Center

Your Privacy

When using this website, Constangy and certain third parties may collect and use cookies or similar technologies to enhance your experience. These technologies may collect information about your device, activity on our website, and preferences. Some cookies are essential to site functionality, while others help us analyze performance and usage trends to improve our content and features.

Please note that if you return to this website from a different browser or device, you may need to reselect your cookie preferences.

For more information about our privacy practices, including your rights and choices, please see our Privacy Policy. 

Strictly Necessary Cookies

Always Active

Strictly Necessary Cookies are essential for the website to function, and cannot be turned off. We use this type of cookie for purposes such as security, network management, and accessibility. You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but if you do so, some parts of the site will not work. 

Functionality Cookies

Always Active

Functionality Cookies are used to enhance the functionality and personalization of this website. These cookies support features like embedded content (such as video or audio), keyword search highlighting, and remembering your preferences across pages—for example, your cookie choices or form inputs during submission.

Some of these cookies are managed by third-party service providers whose features are embedded on our site. These cookies do not store personal information and are necessary for certain site features to work properly.

Performance Cookies

Performance cookies help us improve our website by collecting and reporting information on its usage. We access and process information from these cookies at an aggregate level.

Powered by Firmseek