Tech Company Sues Gartner Because It Doesn't Like How Gartner Placed It In Its Magic Quadrant
from the hello-first-amendment dept
While I'm no fan of Gartner, and tend to think its analysis is pretty weak in many cases, a recent lawsuit filed by ZL Technologies, because ZL doesn't like how Gartner ranked it in Gartner's famous "magic quadrant" analysis, is pretty silly, and hopefully will get thrown out quickly. Gartner has every right to rank companies as it sees fit -- just as courts have noted that Google has every right to rank websites as it sees fit. Even if there are questions about the integrity of Gartner's rankings, I don't see how that's a legal issue at all. All it might do is call into question the value of relying on Gartner's ranking system. But that's a business issue, not a legal one. The court will hopefully toss this lawsuit out quickly on First Amendment grounds, and let Gartner go on pushing out magic quadrants, no matter how flawed they might be.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: analysts, free speech, magic quadrant, opinion
Companies: gartner, zl
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
gartner's pretty shady
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
An example might be that more review time / rankings are made for companies that also buy advertising. It might not be intentional, but rather a question of knowing who to call, access, contact, whatever.
It is a questionable lawsuit perhaps, but the questions raised seem very topical this week.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is NOTHING like page ranking
Gartner's flawed "magic squares" is equivalant to speaking poorly about a company's performance/potential and by doing so with a "scientific analysis" method behind it this presents the company's ranking in a seemingly "factual" manner, not just the OPINION of Gartner. That is the exact definition of slander, no matter how creatively presented.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wasn't sure if I was going to make a comment on this one..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
One more "The datacenter is dead, long live the cloud!" BS "reports" and I might just do it. Gartner doesn't help and I don't know one local CIO who even gives two shits about what they say.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ZL vs. Gartner Amended Complaint Announcement
In the first round of ZL’s legal dispute with Gartner, Gartner argued to the Court that its rankings and other statements in the proprietary “Magic Quadrant Reports” are merely opinions that are not based upon fact, and that they are understood as such by the readers of those reports. However, Gartner’s past statements in marketing materials, white papers, blogs and even the Magic Quadrant Reports themselves, assert that their research and analysts’ opinions are based on a body of facts compiled through what is asserted to be a rigorous process.
The amended complaint clarifies ZL’s contentions about the inaccuracy of Gartner’s reports, the inherent conflict of interest arising out of Gartner’s voluminous business with the vendors it reviews, and its subsequent bias towards large and established vendors. The amended complaint also adds new detail about Gartner’s repeated claims that its research is based on objective fact—a position exactly opposite to the stance forwarded by Gartner in court.
While this case is focused on ZL’s dispute with Gartner over the erroneous statements in Gartner’s publications, the issues here also implicate Gartner’s larger business model. Gartner plainly admits that it attempts to leverage value from its largest clients, many of whom are also vendors covered in the company’s research. ZL’s legal filings describe how that business model causes Gartner to favor those large companies at the expense of identifying the best technologies, thus misleading not just the vendors who are inaccurately reviewed by Gartner, but the consumers who base their IT purchasing decisions on Gartner’s biased research.
ZL is seeking injunctive relief as well as compensatory and punitive damages from Gartner.
The amended complaint can be found here: http://www.zlti.com/courtdocs/docs/First_Amended_Complaint.pdf
[ link to this | view in chronology ]