31–40 of 51 posts
> The dueling teams of lawyers have spent millions creating elaborate presentations Did the lawyers spend millions, or did they bill millions?
Well I'm glad to see the end of that. Its quite possible some courts (judges/juries) would not have grasped the true ramifications of this claim and may have opened a can of worms.
It is not in the jury's remit to "grasp the true ramifications of this claim". They have to judge it based solely on the merits of the case and the law being applied.
If Eolas had a valid case then they should be paid, even if it means problems with companies that are "too big to fail" and the rest of us.
^^ The list of companies who settled with Eloas before the patent was ruled invalid.
A part of me wishes companies had a legal obligation to fight patent claims they believed to be invalid. Settling hurts us all.
> Apple, Argosy Publishing, Blockbuster, Citigroup, eBay, Frito-Lay, JP Morgan Chase, New Frontier Media, Office Depot, Perot Systems, Playboy Enterprises International, Rent-A-Center, Sun Microsystems (bought by Oracle while this litigation was underway), and Texas Instruments. ^^ The list of companies who settled with Eloas before the patent was ruled invalid. A part of me wishes companies had a legal obligation to…
Google, Amazon, Adobe, CDW Corp, JCPenney, Staples and Yahoo. [1]
Well done guys. Long live the fighters!
[1] http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-02-09/google-amazon-co...
Heck, they were talking about basically shutting down the web or turning it into yet another "you have to pay big bucks to participate" medium of which we definitely have enough already.
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…
agreed, it doesn't seem like it should be a jury trial, but instead should be just a hearing in front of matter experts. What does joe schmoe know about the nuances around patent law? There is a reason there are lawyers who specialize their entire practice just around patent law.
Just curious--pretty much neutrally curious--do you feel the same way about medicine? Civil engineering?
"What does joe schmoe know about the nuances around prenatal genetic screening?"
"What does joe schmoe know about the nuances around suspension bridges?"
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…