| |||||||||||||
There's a Verdict in Apple v. Samsung (Groklaw)There's a Verdict in Apple v. Samsung (Groklaw)Posted Aug 27, 2012 20:01 UTC (Mon) by Kluge (guest, #2881)In reply to: There's a Verdict in Apple v. Samsung (Groklaw) by raven667 Parent article: There's a Verdict in Apple v. Samsung (Groklaw)
Given that a (12 person?) jury does *not* and cannot represent many viewpoints, and in this case appears to represent the viewpoint of the single self-appointed expert who was the jury foreman, whose views could not be challenged in court by Samsung, I don't see how this verdict is "more fair" in any way.
(Log in to post comments)
There's a Verdict in Apple v. Samsung (Groklaw) Posted Aug 27, 2012 21:28 UTC (Mon) by raven667 (subscriber, #5198) [Link]
I believe it was a 9 person jury, randomly selected, and they did represent different viewpoints, including one viewpoint of a patent holder. Do you really think that juries should have their deliberations challenged by the lawyers of the case or did you just say that because you don't like the outcome? Fairness doesn't mean always getting what you want or everyone always agreeing, in fact that would be definitely un-fair.
There's a Verdict in Apple v. Samsung (Groklaw) Posted Aug 27, 2012 22:35 UTC (Mon) by bojan (subscriber, #14302) [Link]
> including one viewpoint of a patent holder
Please do yourself a favour and read his patent:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect2=PTO1&...
Obvious, non-inventive, too general and filed 3 years after Tivo was a product.
More like viewpoint of a patent holder wannabe...
There's a Verdict in Apple v. Samsung (Groklaw) Posted Sep 7, 2012 8:02 UTC (Fri) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link]
The accounts I've read from jury members in that case suggest the jury had plenty of different points of view and they debated their way to a conclusion.
|
|||||||||||||