Jury instruction 26.
Now, I will explain the law governing
defense based on the statutory right of anyone to make “fair
copyrighted works. Anyone may use any copyrighted
work in a reasonable way
under the circumstances without the
consent of the copyright owner if it would
public interest. Such use of a copyrighted work is called a
use.” The owner of a copyright cannot prevent others
from making a fair use of
the owner’s copyrighted work. For
example, fair use may include use for
news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for
classroom use), scholarship, or research.
From the article you
Thompson did suggest there was a general sense
some jurors that Oracle's intellectual property claims
might not be in the
public's best interest.
Or to switch that around... Allowing
google's "Fair Use"
defense would "advance the public interest". Thus the
evaluation of whether Google's usage would "advance the
interest" is very much on topic, as per the Jury
opposed to what the AppleVSamsung jury which basically
ignored the jury
instructions... BY THEIR OWN DESCRIPTION.
Well, that's not
patent law is it? That's just
You miss the
point. If they had followed the jury
instructions as they were told to, it
would have told them
what the requirements are for Prior Art. Feel free to look it up right
now, it's under the heading
"FINAL JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 31 UTILITY
Now that you've had a chance to familiarise
ask you this question. Where does the Jury Instruction say
something "not being able to run on the same processor"
would invalidate the
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]