I'm certainly not one to be surprised that Google could violate an NDA or trade secrets, but it's not clear to me exactly what they are alleged to have copied. Is it to you?

I mean, the basic concept and viability of an ubiquitous network of balloons providing Internet access had already been presented publicly by Space Data (see [1]), so you didn't have to violate an NDA to know that. The idea that you can control direction by changing altitude is also old as rocks (Jules Verne's Five Weeks in a Balloon is based on it).

And it's not clear to me that they actual alleged that Google copied the actual mechanism and/or used their trial tests data.

[1] http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=6520007226

An NDA deals typical with disclosing of information. E.g. you visit Google to pitch your product and tell them you plan that launch it next year, or you have 200 customers signed up. The NDA says Google can't tell that stuff to the press or your competitors and possibly can't share that information with other divisions within Google (depends on the wording obviously). It would not cover "they'll copy our idea themselves". This is a standard, central concern with anyone pitching to BigCo and something you talk over and strategize about endlessly before the pitch. Everyone basically assumes it is a risk, hence the old advice "don't pitch to Microsoft", or I guess now: Google.

If this is the basis for the case then it obviously has no merit.

Unless it's significantly more than these two patents, google created their system by themselves through lots of hard work and that's a very unfair summary.

They broke a written confidentiality agreement with Space Data. You don't need an agreement like that for things you have patented (and hence are public and protected).

If they actually copied tech, that's bad. But it matters how much they copied. And just because they decided not to license doesn't mean they copied anything. They might have made a 100% independent balloon system, and being in the news while not-first is not 'stealing credit'.

Do you have any concrete proof of the accusations you're making or are you just making things up about Google again?

>This is about blatant theft of a technology they were introduced to under a written agreement of confidentiality.

Claims 'Space Data Corporation', let's not portray their statements as facts until there is evidence to back it up with.