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

Gear

Groklaw Gear

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


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


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
an unjust conclusion is still unjust and should be corrected | 337 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
an unjust conclusion is still unjust and should be corrected
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, December 28 2012 @ 03:25 AM EST
How can a result be seen to be 'fair' or 'just' when the court system finds one
has willfully infringed a patent that is later invalidated by the very authority
(and the term is used loosely) that issues this now invalid and supposedly
willfully infringed patent?

To me it's like someone is convicted of murder but after the guilty verdict is
passed, the murdered person is found alive and well holidaying on some beach (or
some other evidence clearly indicates he could never have been guilty of murder
so the guilty person is still roaming the streets).

In these later cases, there is action taken to correct the injustice and let the
innocent out of prison (if he hasn't been executed already as many an innocent
have) but where patents are concerned it's just the law (said in a judge dread
voice) and no action is taken to correct this obvious injustice.

An unjust conviction is still unjust and should always be corrected for justice
to be seen to be done. This principle should be just as true for civil and
criminal cases.

[ 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 )