Dice vs. Bold: Case closed?

That was the headline on a media release today from Richard Hahn & Associates, detailing developments in the six-month legal dispute between the two providers of central station automation platforms.

So that's it. Case closed, right?

Apparently not.

According to court documents, a federal judge did dismiss three claims that Dice filed against Bold in an amended complaint in the trade secrets case: for unjust enrichment, conversion (civil as opposed to criminal theft), and a request for statutory damages, costs and attorney's fees related to a copyright infringement claim.

But according to Craig Horn, an attorney representing Dice, the Nov. 29 court development was procedural and “the meat of the argument” between the two companies hasn't changed. In other words, the legal battle is far from over.

The case in a nutshell: Dice filed suit against Bold in federal court in August, alleging that Bold unlawfully accessed Dice's proprietary software with the help of a former Dice engineer hired by Bold. Dice, which is seeking damages and compensation, says it spent more than $5 million developing the software that it claims Bold misappropriated.

A boatload of legal briefs, claims and counterclaims have been filed since then, but Dice is holding to four points of its argument: that Bold violated the Michigan Uniform Trade Secret Act, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and that it infringed on Dice's copyrights by creating unauthorized derivative works.

Bold has contested the validity of Dice's claims, calling the lawsuit “baseless” and “a misguided attempt to level the playing field.” David McDaniel, an attorney representing Bold, declined to comment on the case today to Security Systems News.

Horn said depositions have been scheduled for the next couple of weeks and “we should know a lot more in a month than we do now.”

“Apparently, Bold is still taking the position that they haven't done anything wrong,” he said. “It's kind of an all-or-nothing proposition. Either we're right or Bold's right, and I guess that still remains to be seen.”