Quote:
Originally Posted by pwalker8
It's bad news for anyone who likes tech devices. Patents are way out of control. I have quite a few apple devices and much prefer the iPhone/iPad over the android devices, but these fights should be in the court of consumer demand, not in a court of law.
|
This is good news for anyone who likes good tech devices. If 4 years of design work can be copied by another company in 3 months, you won't get carefully designed devices at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham
|
This implication is that they skipped it during the first day of deliberations because it was bogging them down.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kennyc
Seems grounds for a mistrial right there, if this was officially said by a juror.
|
Juror comments relating to deliberation are never grounds for a mistrial (unless they relate to bribery or another outside influence).
Quote:
Originally Posted by joehunt
From the same article:
Hmmm a jury discounting all evidence presented with the exception of what was entered by Apple's attorneys on the first day of trial  |
The first day of *deliberations,* not the first day of trial. The first day of deliberations came after four weeks of trial.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham
His comments are even more astonishing when you note that Samsung didn't start to present evidence until the second week.
And the juror also appears to completely miss the point that if the prior art evidence was pursued and found to invalidate the patent, then it was irrelevant whether Samsung infringed.
Graham
|
See above.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave_S
Here is another interesting point of view on that at Groklaw. 
|
Groklaw is a FOSS advocacy site (which is fine), but all of their "analysis" goes through that filter. Their analysis in this case has been horrible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tubemonkey
This is getting curiouser and curiouser. Does a mistrial loom ahead?
|
No; see above.