Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 29th May 2011 17:23 UTC, submitted by John
Legal In order to not overwhelm OSNews with even more legal news, I didn't report on the recent developments in Apple v. Samsung until we had some more stuff to consolidate. Well, since the goings been getting good lately there, let's talk about it. Samsung was ordered to hand over a slew of unreleased products and materials to Apple, and now, Samsung, for its part, has demanded that Apple hands over the iPhone 5 and iPad 3 to Samsung. If they exist. This is gettin' good.
Permalink for comment 475011
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

The question I'm having though; are Apple's lawyers all engineers also who can fully comprehend the technical details in order to find valid patent infringement? Trusting a lawyer to review and report on technological matters seems like trusting a florist to diagnose human illness and prescribe proper medication.

A room full of laywers reviewing in-development technologies hardly seems like the basis for valid recognition and claim of infringement. Won't Apple still need an engineer in the room to consult with the lawyers?

You don't understand how the court is REQUIRED to view the lawyers. They are to be viewed as the party themselves. Your argument only, legally, makes sense when a NEUTRAL 3rd Party is involved. That 3rd party makes the determination of similarity in a non-biased manner by making, essentially, cliff notes as to their commonalities and their differences.

Because lawyers are direct representatives, the court must assume that they possess all knowledge and skills as the party in question. The courts are not to give special exception to lawyers because of their presumed lack of knowledge or relation to the party, lawyers are YOU in every sense of the law. You can even go to prison for the things they do AS YOU.

Power of attorney is a MF!

--The loon

Reply Parent Score: 2