08-28-2012, 10:10 AM | #361 | |
Groupie
Posts: 182
Karma: 1316076
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Florida
Device: iPad
|
Quote:
|
|
08-28-2012, 11:33 AM | #362 | |
Guru
Posts: 895
Karma: 4383958
Join Date: Nov 2007
Device: na
|
Quote:
Not sure if this has already been posted, but since it's related to the current apple/samsung case and the issue of jurors talking about deliberations http://www.techdirt.com/articles/201...-factors.shtml @Harry: It's an interesting issue for those of us in the UK. If what the jurors (in the US case) have done really was to ignore prior art, the judge's instructions and try to punish samsung rather than just vote on the law at hand, in the UK we'd likely never have found out. Unless a juror reported concerns to officials at the court, but if they all thought what they were doing was perfectly acceptable (even if it wasn't), we'd likely never find out. Last edited by JoeD; 08-28-2012 at 11:36 AM. |
|
08-28-2012, 11:38 AM | #363 | |
eBook Enthusiast
Posts: 85,544
Karma: 93383043
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6
|
Quote:
|
|
08-28-2012, 11:48 AM | #364 | |
monkey on the fringe
Posts: 45,476
Karma: 158151390
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Seattle Metro
Device: Moto E6, Echo Show
|
Quote:
|
|
08-28-2012, 11:51 AM | #365 |
Wizard
Posts: 2,743
Karma: 32912427
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: North Yorkshire, UK
Device: Kobo H20, Pixel 2, Samsung Chromebook Plus
|
|
08-28-2012, 11:53 AM | #366 | |
Guru
Posts: 895
Karma: 4383958
Join Date: Nov 2007
Device: na
|
Quote:
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?s...12082510525390 I won't pretend to know the ins and outs of it though, I could be talking rubbish. Talking in general now, not specifically about the apple/samsung case, but what I found interesting was that if a jury can convince themselves that what they're doing is right, even when it's wrong and are forbidden from discussing their deliberations post trial, how will we ever find out that a miscarriage of justice has occurred. Where as in the US, there's no restriction on discussion post trial, so there's every chance a juror will proudly explain their decisions and flaws come to light. Granted, there's an appeals process which you'd hope with a new jury would avoid a repeat and there's the flip side of a guilty person suddenly getting their case overturned because a jury spoke about something that was then used as a technicality. I'm honestly not sure which system is better, can (US) or can't (UK) talk about it. It's something I'd never actually considered until reading todays posts. |
|
08-28-2012, 12:15 PM | #367 | |
Wizard
Posts: 2,743
Karma: 32912427
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: North Yorkshire, UK
Device: Kobo H20, Pixel 2, Samsung Chromebook Plus
|
Here's a full 15 minute interview with the jury foreman, asked reasonably probing questions.
http://www.bloomberg.com/video/apple...g7xrWa5Wg.html He does clarify some of his earlier statements, but tellingly, he repeats the comment about moving on after getting bogged down on the first day (which was previously noted as being related to prior art on the trade dress patent), and he never says that they went back and addressed this later. He reaffirms that they moved on and went straight to the patent infringement checks and then the damage awards. He concentrates repeatedly on the wilful infringement of the patents, but it really does seem like they skipped going back to check whether the prior art invalidated the trade dress patents. At about 13:20 in the interviewer asks specifically about the design patent and the fact that they found it to be valid. He doesn't answer along the lines of "we reviewed the prior art and found that it wasn't sufficient to invalidate the patent", instead he talks about checking the accused devices against the design patent to see if they infringed. The closest he comes is at about 14:10 when he says regarding the Samsung devices and the iPhone: Quote:
The prior art was key to whether there was a valid trade dress patent for Samsung to infringe, and it is still appears that this jury foreman missed that point. Graham Last edited by Graham; 08-28-2012 at 12:18 PM. |
|
08-28-2012, 12:39 PM | #368 | |
The Dank Side of the Moon
Posts: 35,872
Karma: 118716293
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Device: Kindle2; Kindle Fire
|
Quote:
I do think it is the patent office's job to prevent issuing of frivolous patents --this rounded corner rectangle being frivolous to the max. The jury should have overturned it as well as the flat black screen patent... there was clearly prior art for both. Last edited by kennyc; 08-29-2012 at 06:31 AM. Reason: issueD |
|
08-28-2012, 01:26 PM | #369 | |||||
Banned
Posts: 1,118
Karma: 3111746
Join Date: Oct 2011
Device: Kindle & little green monster
|
Quote:
fwiw, groklaw had a -epic rant- that said the same today. Pretty good. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||
08-29-2012, 09:33 AM | #370 | |
Interested Bystander
Posts: 3,725
Karma: 19728152
Join Date: Jun 2008
Device: Note 4, Kobo One
|
Quote:
Last edited by murraypaul; 08-29-2012 at 10:03 AM. |
|
08-29-2012, 09:51 AM | #371 | |
Wizard
Posts: 2,743
Karma: 32912427
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: North Yorkshire, UK
Device: Kobo H20, Pixel 2, Samsung Chromebook Plus
|
Quote:
Here's the link to the full jury instructions: http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/13...structions.pdf See pp 44 to 47 for the instructions regarding invalidation of the utility patents due to anticipation or obviousness, and pp 66 to 70 for the instructions regarding invalidation of the design patents due to prior art. Graham |
|
08-29-2012, 08:00 PM | #372 | |
Guru
Posts: 895
Karma: 4383958
Join Date: Nov 2007
Device: na
|
Quote:
I was thinking more general though and not just about patent cases. If a jury reaches a verdict based on flawed reasoning, in the US system it may come out, in our system it's likely that it wouldn't. In our system we're relying heavily on the jury understanding (and knowing whether they've understood) the judges instructions on what they should be deliberating on and what they shouldn't include in their decision making process. Are there any recordings or transcripts made of the deliberations? If not, I wonder if it'd be a good idea to do so and to provide those transcripts to the judge (perhaps anonymised) so they can verify their instructions have been followed. Or to the appeals judge? Although, I've probably overlooked something and that there's sound reasons for why no transcripts/recordings are made (assuming they aren't') We place a lot of trust in whether the jury has understood their instructions correctly. In most trials, it may be that it's hard not to understand them, but in technical cases, what seems logical to a non-technical person could be completely incorrect. Last edited by JoeD; 08-29-2012 at 08:06 PM. |
|
08-29-2012, 08:16 PM | #373 |
Illiterate newbie
Posts: 661
Karma: 1702090
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Finland
Device: Sony PRS-T1
|
Specialy fun when patents seem to be written in the most complicated way. Or obscured just so the prior-art can't be noticed at one glance...
|
08-29-2012, 08:35 PM | #374 | ||
Is that a sandwich?
Posts: 8,189
Karma: 100500000
Join Date: Jun 2010
Device: Nook Glowlight Plus
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
08-29-2012, 09:55 PM | #375 |
Wizard
Posts: 1,759
Karma: 30063305
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Singapore
Device: Boyue
|
The major problem was that the jury foreman was a patent holder and that made him an expert in the eyes of the other jurors or he portrayed himself as such. And they took his words for whatever instead of asking for clarification etc.
The jury in Google vs Oracle was better if they did not understand anything they asked for clarification. Here it looks like the Foreman decided the verdict and railroaded the other jurors I do agree with the jury that samsung copied some of Apples design but I also think Samsung was able to show prior art for many of the patents so I don't think the verdict should have been so one sided. |
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Samsung v. Apple | carpetmojo | News | 625 | 11-18-2012 11:07 AM |
Samsung didn't copy Apple, Apple says | afv011 | Android Devices | 5 | 07-19-2012 05:50 PM |
Apple vs Samsung US Ruling | JD Gumby | News | 14 | 06-30-2012 03:49 PM |
Patented computer software may replace human authors | Alexander Turcic | Lounge | 21 | 09-22-2009 11:22 AM |