Gartner's defence was that the Magic Quadrant is not meant to represent statements of fact but is based on pure opinion. So that's all right then.
Like some recent court cases involving large IT service companies, this court case and the discussion it has provoked exposed some critical issues, and some people expressed surprise to learn things about MQ they hadn't previously appreciated.
Gartner won the case, with ZL promising to return for a rematch, but the fall-out from the case continues to worry the devoted.
Commentary before the verdictGartner in the dock over Magic Quadrant, Dennis Howlett, ZDnet Oct 2009
Gartner’s Magic Quadrant Goes to Court Tom Foremski, Oct 2009
Gartner Sued Over Magic Quadrant Dave Kellogg, Oct 2009
Gartner Magic Quadrant lawsuit: Sour grapes or real gripes? Michael Krigsman ZDNet Oct 2009
Legal dispute sheds light on how Gartner's "Magic Quadrant" is made up Tom Foremski, ZDNet Oct 2009
Email archiving vendor sues Gartner over Magic Quadrant Beth Pariseau Oct 2009
After the verdictGartner wins in ZL lawsuit: but is it a pyrrhic victory? Dennis Howlett, ZDNet Nov 2009
I try to act the opposite ... of what Gartner recommends bjbrock Nov 2009
Why Gartner's Magic Quadrant Will Be Irrelevant In A Few Years? Alex on ITIL, Dec 2009
Stalking horse?Few people had heard of ZL technologies before it filed the suit, so it has gained plenty in publicity from the case. But larger vendors were clearly watching the case with close interest. Now SAP is set to challenge the Gartner assessment of Business Objects.
SAP's Business Objects Problems Go Beyond Gartner's Quadrant, Ann All IT Business Edge Feb 2010