Texas Jury Strikes Down Patent Trolls’ Claim To Own the Interactive Web
1–10 of 51 posts
Re: Texas Jury Strikes Down Patent Trolls’ Claim To Own the Interactive Web
#2You 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...
Re: Texas Jury Strikes Down Patent Trolls’ Claim To Own the Interactive Web
#3> The dueling teams of lawyers have spent millions creating elaborate presentations
Did the lawyers spend millions, or did they bill millions?
Re: Texas Jury Strikes Down Patent Trolls’ Claim To Own the Interactive Web
#4Thank God. I didn't realize UCal had a stake in this. WTF? Don't they know better?
Re: Texas Jury Strikes Down Patent Trolls’ Claim To Own the Interactive Web
#5Maybe 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!
Re: Texas Jury Strikes Down Patent Trolls’ Claim To Own the Interactive Web
#6You 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 going on (these trials tend to last less than a week of 7 hour days).
-There are many different complex topics being addressed in that time span: the patents, what is being accused, etc.
-What is said is being said by competing groups of apparently competent people.
-Those people are saying widely different things about the aforementioned complex subject matter.
-Everything is being said in an extremely serious environment (Federal Court) which lends substantial gravity to each side.
-Jurors are not to consult information beyond what is presented to them in court.
Re: Texas Jury Strikes Down Patent Trolls’ Claim To Own the Interactive Web
#7Thank God. I didn't realize UCal had a stake in this. WTF? Don't they know better?
That would strike me as worthy of a black mark by the industry---a statement that we will not hire your students if you back this stuff.
Re: Texas Jury Strikes Down Patent Trolls’ Claim To Own the Interactive Web
#8You 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…
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.
Re: Texas Jury Strikes Down Patent Trolls’ Claim To Own the Interactive Web
#9You 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…
> -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. (That cuts both ways, though: nobody biased towards patents will ever sit on a patent trial either.)
Re: Texas Jury Strikes Down Patent Trolls’ Claim To Own the Interactive Web
#10Earlier 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.
Experts are employed in most (probably closer to all) patent trials, but they tend to have an offsetting effect (or at least that is the opinion).
I think a system of appointed masters has its issues too. Theoretically, that is the PTOs role right?
The closest idea I've been able to think of is a modification to the jury system so that the base pool that jurors are randomly selected from consists of people with experience in that field. Essentially, the base pool is of persons of ordinary skill in the art. I have no idea how to practically implement that though.