decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
You do have an opportunity | 201 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
You do have an opportunity
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 14 2012 @ 12:14 PM EDT

As I understand (I'm not Legally educated in any sense of the phrase cept what I've learned through Groklaw) any third party can file a "friend of Court" brief. Whether or not that brief will be even glanced at is another question.

Generally the onus is on the plaintiff to prove a number of things including:

    The patent was a key selling point with customers (this helps increases the damages wanted)
while the onus is on the defendant to prove a number of things including:
    The patent was not a key selling point with customers (this helps decrease the damages wanted)
They usually do that through expert testimony.

RAS

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Damages
Authored by: mbouckaert on Tuesday, August 14 2012 @ 03:58 PM EDT
Can someone maybe suggest that some people (including me) do
buy Samsung (or HTC or...) because these are *not* iPhones?

I don't want to pay to have to deal with that [expletive
deleted] ecosystem.

I don't mind automatic transmissions on cars anymore, but
this iPrison is not for me.

(and no, not my kind of cool either)

---
bck

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Damages
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, August 15 2012 @ 05:19 AM EDT
I accept Apple make good designs, but I doubt I would ever buy
one. For me Apple and Microsoft have for many years an image to be
very focused on legal procedures. And I would be afraid paying
legal fees in stead of design and production costs.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Damages
Authored by: ThrPilgrim on Wednesday, August 15 2012 @ 05:21 AM EDT
Your Honour,

We would like to call all 22.7 million Samsung phone owners and ask them why
they bought the phone.

Yours, the Samsung legal team.

---
Beware of him who would deny you access to information for in his heart he
considers himself your master.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )