21–30 of 51 posts
Thank God. I didn't realize UCal had a stake in this. WTF? Don't they know better?
Amusingly, ViolaWWW, one of the pieces of prior art used by the defendants, was written by a Berkeley student.
Thank God. I didn't realize UCal had a stake in this. WTF? Don't they know better?
http://www.ucop.edu/news/archives/2003/aug11art1qanda.htm
http://www.ucop.edu/news/archives/2003/aug11art1.htm
Looks like the UC is not really so directly involved anymore; just taking it's cut from a patent it owns part of by virtue of the fact it owns part of its employees' inventions.
You know a patent claim has no merit when even an East Texas court won't accept it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_District_Court_f...
EDT has been more favorable to defendants than plaintiffs for quite a while. It isn't even in the top 5 for plaintiff win rates. The numbers claimed in that Wikipedia article are wildly off. Here is a much better researched source: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1597919
Your source's analysis reflects the years 2000-2010, while the citation given for Wikipedia's article is based upon numbers provided to the New York Times for the years 1991-2006 (which included a nine-fold increase in the number of cases filed during the years 2002-2006).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honestly, I think being a juror in a patent trial is a hard proposition anywhere. Why do I say that: -The subject matter is likely to be mostly to totally outside of a person's technical depth and factual experience. (Here I try and think if someone asked me to decide some question related to something like advanced particle physics, chemistry, or the tax code). -There is not that much time to figure out what is goin…
> -The subject matter is likely to be mostly to totally outside of a person's technical depth and factual experience. (Here I try and think if someone asked me to decide some question related to something like advanced particle physics, chemistry, or the tax code). Not just "likely"; anyone who had such experience would get kicked off the jury. Nobody on Hacker News will ever get to serve as a juror on a patent trial…
I was disqualified from the jury on a drunk driving trial, because the defense was based in some way on the Breathalyzer and its design or calibration, and I have a BSCS.
Thank God. I didn't realize UCal had a stake in this. WTF? Don't they know better?
My understanding is that the person holding the patents in question came up with the "invention" while employed by UCSF. Amusingly, ViolaWWW, one of the pieces of prior art used by the defendants, was written by a Berkeley student.
You know a patent claim has no merit when even an East Texas court won't accept it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_District_Court_f...
Honestly, I think being a juror in a patent trial is a hard proposition anywhere. Why do I say that: -The subject matter is likely to be mostly to totally outside of a person's technical depth and factual experience. (Here I try and think if someone asked me to decide some question related to something like advanced particle physics, chemistry, or the tax code). -There is not that much time to figure out what is goin…
Judges tend to think that everything should be resolved by the court, after all - they are paid to be there. Jurors tend to think that people should just sort things out without dragging innocent bystanders into a jury box.
Also, people with legal training are taught to think everything deserves compensation, and the only question is who to bill.
Maybe they're seeing so many patents they're starting to realize how many of those patents are just ... stupid? When you're exposed to a field more (lots of cases kinda do that), you start to think more like a person in that field and suddenly previously non-obvious things are obvious!
Who, the jurors? It's unlikely any juror on this case has been a juror before in a patent case.
2) Patent it.
3) ...
4) Sue EVERYONE.
5) Now any juror on a case will have an opinion on IP law.
Maybe they're seeing so many patents they're starting to realize how many of those patents are just ... stupid? When you're exposed to a field more (lots of cases kinda do that), you start to think more like a person in that field and suddenly previously non-obvious things are obvious!
Who, the jurors? It's unlikely any juror on this case has been a juror before in a patent case.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who, the jurors? It's unlikely any juror on this case has been a juror before in a patent case.
1) Predict that a new piece of technology will be used to solve a common problem (i.e. using a Facebook page as a resume). 2) Patent it. 3) ... 4) Sue EVERYONE. 5) Now any juror on a case will have an opinion on IP law.