|
Authored by: JonCB on Tuesday, July 09 2013 @ 11:53 PM EDT |
The patent now makes no sense. Good luck
convincing a jury that you
don't infringe something that is
impossible to understand. If you have to
assume patents are
valid as a jury, yet it is impossible to figure out what it
means how can you find infringement or non-infringement?
In
a world where the patent system is sane and adds value,
this should be more of
a problem for Apple than Samsung. The
counter proposal would be Good Luck
convincing a jury that
you infringe something that is impossible to understand.
Bear in mind that patent validity being assumed is one
thing, but the
plaintiff still has to show evidence that the
accused actually infringes the
patent.
Whether we live in a world where the patent system is sane
and
adds value... that is a question for each person to
answer for themselves.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, July 10 2013 @ 07:45 AM EDT |
The foreman in the case had it wrong.
The Court instructions clearly
allow for the Jury to find the patents invalid if they choose to do so.
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, July 10 2013 @ 09:25 AM EDT |
"Once Apple reworded their patent how do we know that Samsung devices
infringe the revised wording?"
Kindly identify this rewording.
There was no rewording.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|