|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 23 2012 @ 03:38 PM EDT |
Yawn. Is he actually writing about the same case? Seems more like fantasy-land
than anything else.
I'll admit, I wasted a few minutes scanning through some of the older posts (on
his site). Got bored after the third time I'd read an authoritative opinion
that turned out to be 100% wrong based on what actually happened in court the
next day (or later).[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 23 2012 @ 05:13 PM EDT |
"A jury trial on patent infringement is a lottery since anyone who really
would have the knowledge that is needed to understand the issue typically gets
excluded."
Yes it is, and that's the problem. If you're planning to litigate over a patent
- and that does seem to be the plan - then the onus us on you to make it clear
enough that juries will rule in your favour.
And if you CAN'T do that, well maybe that speaks volumes about what you're
patenting.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: calris74 on Wednesday, May 23 2012 @ 10:36 PM EDT |
Florian Mueller @FOSSpatents: ORCL
and GOOG
stock
price experienced almost
same gain
today. Investors knew that the patent part
of the case
wasn't
particularly important.
Actually, I take
the stock price movement as evidence that
investors had already made a smart
guess on which way it was
going to go and are now glad the whole thing is
over.
Big stock swings are due more to bad guesses by investors
than
from the actual event itself[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|