171–180 of 431 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Judges in the US run for office like politicians and thus have donors to their campaigns. Sorry for the confusion.
Ah, I see. Thanks. What I don't see is how anyone who is inherently subject to popular opinion can possibly rule impartially in the interests of justice, but that's a different question.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
| We do not have equal access to our judicial system in the United States. If you have money, you have the power... Your POV that money distorts and helps determine winners, while seeming so prima facie obvious, does not come close to getting to the real problem. I know this because I have money and I've spent well over a million dollars on attorneys in the last decade and I got very little in the way of ... not just…
I'm one of those hated attorneys. And, in my experience, while there are issues that sometimes may seem to outsiders like pointless minutae that keep people from getting at the real issues, the rules of civil procedure (especially at the federal level) are designed to do exactly what you want: to facilitate getting to the core of the issue as fast as possible (of course, if the core of the issue is a factual question…
I have a comment and a question:
The comment. Summary judgement does not accomplish what I think sheepleherd was proposing. As you say, if you get a summary judgment against you, you go home. That means that a judge has to be convinced that there is definitely no case in order to issue one. What's needed, rather, is a speedy determination of who seems to be in the right. It should not be final but should determine who pays going forward.
The question. What do you see as the problem in cases like this? Or do you see a problem?
I find it oddly funny how Google hasn't stepped in to support their "clients", I'd think they'd help shutdown patent trolls so developers can continue to improve and distribute applications
It's only a matter of time until a patent troll writes a for loop on the store index to send out infringement suits DMCA-takedown style.
How is this even for real - why is Google not putting an end to it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yea they could in multiple ways. They could sue to the troll for a declaratory judgement of invalidity and non infringement. Or they just indemnify their app stor developers for any patent liability caused by using their product.
>Or they just indemnify their app stor developers for any patent liability caused by using their product. What about actual patent violations?
Someone with money and lawyers needs to sue the state of Texas for allowing a father and son duo to practice in such a conflict of interest fashion. This is a clear cut case of corruption.
I'm not even sure where to begin with this :) First, you can't sue a state without their permission, they have sovereign immunity. Second, you would have no standing unless you were directly affected Third, outside of violating non-binding legal ethics rules, it's not clear what law you think this somehow violates. The state can pretty much do whatever it wants here. Plus, all of this is federal anyway, so suing the…
I find it oddly funny how Google hasn't stepped in to support their "clients", I'd think they'd help shutdown patent trolls so developers can continue to improve and distribute applications
Seriously - what the fuck Google? It's only a matter of time until a patent troll writes a for loop on the store index to send out infringement suits DMCA-takedown style.
A couple of misconceptions in this video. Patent infringement is not a crime. A son lawyer appearing in front of his judge father would not be allowed for conflict of interest in most circumstances. That being said, patent trolling is obviously a problem, and legislation to fix the problem is making its way through Congress.