
Well, that didn't take long. Groklaw notes
several interesting inconsistencies and other issues with the jury verdict. "If it would take a lawyer three days to make sure he understood the terms in the form, how did the jury not need the time to do the same? There were 700 questions, remember, and one thing is plain, that the jury didn't take the time to avoid inconsistencies, one of which resulted in the jury casually throwing numbers around, like $2 million dollars for a nonfringement. Come on. This is farce." My
favourite inconsistency: a Samsung phone
with a keyboard, four buttons, and a large Samsung logo on top infringes the iPhone design patent. And yet, we were told (in the comments, on other sites) that the Samsung f700 was not prior art... Because it had a keyboard. I smell fish.
Member since:
2006-01-28
What exactly does your post add to the conversation?
Are the jurors going to come out and admit openly that they are inherently biased against Apple, because one is an American company and the other a Korean one?
Are they going to admit that they have no understanding of technology?
Trade dress patents, really? Is that what the technology world has come down to?
Only thing this has proven is that Apple and Microsoft are not able to compete on a leveled playing field.
Too bad Microsoft´s ecosystem of applications is so entrenched because of all their early illegal behavior or the world of computing would look so much different: We could have Be, we could have a real qnx-based desktop, we could have Linux making even more serious inroads on the desktop.
I am done with this pathetic debate and the iClueless fashionistas.
Edited 2012-08-26 14:43 UTC