Company Sues Gartner Again For Not Putting It In The Magic Quadrant

from the you're-going-to-need-some-magic... dept

No matter what you think of Gartner's research (and we've been quite clear that we don't think much of it), the lawsuit brought by ZL Tech against Gartner earlier this year for not putting it in Gartner's infamous "magic quadrant" was a non-starter from the beginning, and it was no surprise that it was quickly tossed, as the judge noted that Gartner is free to have its own opinion. ZL should have taken the hint. Instead, it's amended the complaint and tried again. You can see the full complaint here or read it below: It's basically more of the same. ZL is still claiming that Gartner has no right to its opinion, saying that because Gartner bases its opinion on "a body of facts" through "a rigorous process" it's no longer an opinion. That's flat out ridiculous. All opinions are based on a body of facts, and even if you have a rigorous process by which you figure out how to sort your opinions, it's still an opinion.

ZL also talks about Gartner's well-known conflicts of interest, a topic that is widely discussed and certainly has done great harm to Gartner's credibility in many circles, while still not being illegal. Basically ZL just comes across as a company angry that Gartner didn't rank it high enough, which -- in my opinion (please don't sue) -- raises plenty of questions about why you'd want to work with a company so thin-skinned and sensitive to someone else's opinion.

Filed Under: magic quadrant, opinion
Companies: gartner, zl

Yes, Gartner Is Free To Pick Which Companies Fit In Its Magic Quadrant

from the and-which-don't dept

Whatever you might think of Gartner's research and its silly "magic quadrant" system, I don't think anyone could reasonably question that it was just Gartner's opinion. Yet, a few months ago, we wrote about a company, ZL, that was so upset that Gartner put it in its niche quadrant, rather than the desired "magic quadrant," that it sued. We didn't expect the lawsuit to get very far (similar lawsuits over how Google ranks companies have been tossed pretty quickly). And, indeed, a judge appears to have found little worthwhile in ZL's lawsuit, quickly dismissing all of the arguments, and noting that Gartner is free to have its own damn opinion, no matter how much others (or the subjects of that opinion) might disagree:

"Finally, ZL argues that Gartner's representation that it provides 'highly discerning research that is objective, defensible, and credible to help [customers] do their job better' implies that its Reports contain objective assertions of fact. Gartner notes that this language appears not in the MQ Report but on its website and that the language describes Gartner's research services generally rather than the MQ Report in particular.... More to the point, the terms 'objective, defensible, and credible' do not imply the assertion of factual information. Gartner argues convincingly that even if its self-description did refer to the statements within the MQ Report, its 'sophisticated readers' -- corporate and government executives and professionals -- would not infer that Gartner's rankings were anything other than opinion."

Still, the judge gave ZL an opportunity to amend the complaint, and the statement from the company indicates that it's planning to try to come up with some other ridiculous argument against Gartner. Maybe it should just focus on satisfying what its customers want, and stop worrying about what some analyst at Gartner has to say.

Filed Under: magic quadrant, opinion
Companies: gartner, zl

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.

Filed Under: analysts, free speech, magic quadrant, opinion
Companies: gartner, zl