Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 5th Sep 2012 10:43 UTC
Legal "This is in the believe it or not category, but the foreman in the Apple v Samsung trial is still talking about the verdict and why the jurors did what they did. And the more he talks, the worse it gets for that verdict. Gizmodo asked him to sit today for live questions. And believe it or not, he did it. And when asked if the jury was ever asking whether or not a patent should have issued, he claims that they never did because that wasn't their role and the judge told them to assume the patents issued properly and not to second guess that determination. That is so wrong it's not even just wrong. The verdict form and the jury instructions specifically asked them to address that very question." Together with the earlier reports, it's quite clear by now this jury messed up completely. If a device with a keyboard can be found to infringe iPhone design patents, then everything can. This verdict should be flushed down the crapper.
Permalink for comment 534222
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Priorart & patents
by _xmv on Fri 7th Sep 2012 08:55 UTC
Member since:

It's also easy to notice that the foreman had filled patents in the past, patents that were submitted in full knowledge of having seen prior art.

However he did believe that it was ok - and feasible (we know that much), to enforce patents even thus there is prior art, as long as the items are not 100.00% interchangeable.

This does not actually make sense, as iphones and samsung galaxy devices are also not 100.00% interchangeable, patent would also not apply.

Reply Score: 3