ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Computers and the Internet
 

Notices


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags apple , lawsuits , samsung

Reply
Old 25th August 2012, 02:08 AM   #361
GodMark2
Graduate Poster
 
GodMark2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,273
No, Samsumg won.
__________________
Knowing that we do not know, it does not necessarily follow that we can not know.
GodMark2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2012, 03:52 AM   #362
Fast Eddie B
Master Poster
 
Fast Eddie B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Mineral Bluff, GA
Posts: 2,045
Originally Posted by Wangler View Post
This trial result reinforces my firm commitment to never buy an Apple product.

Ever.
Good for you - that's the power a consumer yields. Though I doubt you were ever going to rush into an Apple Store regardless of the outcome here.

Real questions: Do you buy products that copy Apple's designs? Should there be any limit at all on the freedom to copy successful designs? And if not, would that serve to stifle innovation?
Fast Eddie B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2012, 04:19 AM   #363
Alan
Illuminator
 
Alan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,705
There's another Apple vs Samsung court decision from the last day or so. This one in South Korea.

The ruling was that Apple and Samsung both infringed each other's patents on mobile devices. Apple had infringed two patents held by Samsung relating to telecom standards and making information transfer more efficient. Samsung violated one of Apple's: the bounce-back function.

The court ruled against the design similarities, arguing that there's only so much variation that's possible with touch screen devices, and previous products show the similar features, as well as the Galaxy S having three buttons on the front and other things that sufficiently differentiated it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19364875

Last edited by Alan; 25th August 2012 at 04:28 AM.
Alan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2012, 04:24 AM   #364
Wangler
Master Poster
 
Wangler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,228
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie B View Post
Though I doubt you were ever going to rush into an Apple Store regardless of the outcome here.
Correct, which is why I said "reinforces my firm commitment".

Quote:
Real questions: Do you buy products that copy Apple's designs? Should there be any limit at all on the freedom to copy successful designs? And if not, would that serve to stifle innovation?
Answers:

I don't buy products that copy Apple designs in form: no iPad "look-alikes", etc.

However, I do own two Android based devices....I don't know if they contain features or functions that would be considered in a case such as this to be copies or not.

There should certainly be limits on the freedom to copy successful designs. I think that there is ample historical evidence that such limits would not stifle innovation.

Question:

What should be considered a design?
Wangler is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2012, 04:32 AM   #365
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 67,665
Originally Posted by Alan View Post
There's another Apple vs Samsung court decision from the last day or so. This one in South Korea. The ruling was that Apple and Samsung both infringed each other's patents on mobile devices. Apple had infringed two patents held by Samsung, and Samsung violated one of Apple's: the bounce-back function.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19364875
The "bounce back" was one of the elements at the start of thread that I thought was a valid complaint from Apple in regards to the allegations that Samsung was copying something unique to Apple. (Granted the "prior art" that came out in the trial changed my mind about that being a valid patent.)

All I can say is thank goodness none of the earlier innovators in mobile phones took the approach today's international behemoths are taking. If they had then today we'd still be having only mobile phones produced by Motorola and the most transformational period the human race has ever known would have been stillborn.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2012, 04:35 AM   #366
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 67,665
Originally Posted by Wangler View Post
Correct, which is why I said "reinforces my firm commitment".



Answers:

I don't buy products that copy Apple designs in form: no iPad "look-alikes", etc.

...snip...
Other court cases have concluded with the legal decision that the design language simply of "a large rectangular tablet with rounded corners" is not legally protected: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18773690
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2012, 04:43 AM   #367
Fast Eddie B
Master Poster
 
Fast Eddie B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Mineral Bluff, GA
Posts: 2,045
Originally Posted by Wangler View Post

However, I do own two Android based devices....I don't know if they contain features or functions that would be considered in a case such as this to be copies or not.

Question:

What should be considered a design?
Both issues where the jury had to decide.

And did.

With a lot more evidence than we have gleaned from news reports.

It's tricky. Apple lost the case against Microsoft which held that "look and feel" was not protected. Hence, Windows did not "copy" the Macintosh GUI.

It might help frame the discussion to go back five years and remember the original iPhone introduction.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7qPAY9JqE4

You're obviously not an Apple fanboy and might not be impressed. I watched it streaming at my girlfriend (now wife's) apartment, and I was kinda blown away. It really hard to argue that Samsung owes nothing to Apple's innovation - I guess the question is how much?

Last edited by Fast Eddie B; 25th August 2012 at 04:49 AM.
Fast Eddie B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2012, 04:58 AM   #368
Fast Eddie B
Master Poster
 
Fast Eddie B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Mineral Bluff, GA
Posts: 2,045
Was Steve Jobs prescient or what???



His comment?

"And, boy, have we patented it!"
Fast Eddie B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2012, 06:11 AM   #369
BenBurch
Gatekeeper of The Left
 
BenBurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one.
Posts: 35,297
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie B View Post
Was Steve Jobs prescient or what???

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8428/7...4a9771d9_z.jpg

His comment?

"And, boy, have we patented it!"
I am still in awe of his commercial genius.

If I had 5% of that, I'd be worth millions.
__________________
For what doth it profit a man, to fix one bug, but crash the system?
BenBurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2012, 06:54 AM   #370
Wangler
Master Poster
 
Wangler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,228
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie B View Post
It really hard to argue that Samsung owes nothing to Apple's innovation - I guess the question is how much?
The jury says how much is about a billion dollars.

There are two ends to the spectrum, and the sensible answer is somewhere in between.

And these legal decisions are all over the map: Apple wins here, Samsung wins there, they both win in country X, etc.

Apple might get trounced the next round, say regarding the notification bar patent.

I really don't see this judgement reducing my options for non-Apple smartphones and tablets, at least in the short term.
Wangler is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2012, 07:50 AM   #371
kevsta
RBL CHeck Failed
 
kevsta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,140
it was just a battle, the war is likely to get much fiercer IMO

my money is (metaphorically) on Google for the ultimate victory

http://boombustblog.com/blog/item/61...as-anticipated
__________________
"The world will soon wake up to the reality that everyone is broke and can collect nothing from the bankrupt, who are owed unlimited amounts by the insolvent, who are attempting to make late payments on a bank holiday in the wrong country, with an unacceptable currency, against defaulted collateral, of which nobody is sure who holds title." - Anonymous
kevsta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2012, 08:08 AM   #372
Horatius
NWO Kitty Wrangler
 
Horatius's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 23,764
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
The "bounce back" was one of the elements at the start of thread that I thought was a valid complaint from Apple in regards to the allegations that Samsung was copying something unique to Apple. (Granted the "prior art" that came out in the trial changed my mind about that being a valid patent.)


Do the juries ever publish their reasoning on these decisions? Because it would be interesting to see why they decided to uphold that patent. As you say, the prior art we saw looked pretty devastating, but that was when it was being presented by Samsung, who are obviously motivated to try to make them look the same. I wonder if the jury noticed (or were told about) some differences that weren't reported.
__________________
Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd
Horatius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2012, 10:36 AM   #373
Christian Klippel
Master Poster
 
Christian Klippel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Ruhr Area in Germany
Posts: 2,153
My guess is that on appeal a lot of that will be reversed. One issue is that judge Koh denied Samsung to present vital evidence regarding prior art of some designs. Then, the jury had to decide on about 700 questions. And they want to tell us they did that in a few days?

Next, the jury foreman said that the jurors reached a decision, and they did not need the jury instructions to do so. Last but not least they made two extreme mistakes in their findings, where they contradicted themselves. First they found that the Galaxy Tab 10.1 did not infringe, but then awarded about 200k in damages to Apple for that. That also happened for the Intercept, for which they initially awarded 2 million in damages.

Oh, and not to mention that the jury foreman is a patent holder himself.

This does not look like a fair case at all, and definitely not like a fair jury. 700 questions to be decided on. In 3 days? Claiming not to need jury instructions? And what a coincidence, just managed to get it out right before the weekend. With two big contradictions.

That just stinks.

Greetings,

Chris
Christian Klippel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2012, 12:42 PM   #374
BenBurch
Gatekeeper of The Left
 
BenBurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one.
Posts: 35,297
The jury's decision cannot be questioned. As I understand it, only matters of law or matters of redress may be.

And I can't see any reason they should be questioned. Apple had valid patents, enforced them, and won.
__________________
For what doth it profit a man, to fix one bug, but crash the system?
BenBurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2012, 12:59 PM   #375
Christian Klippel
Master Poster
 
Christian Klippel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Ruhr Area in Germany
Posts: 2,153
Originally Posted by BenBurch View Post
The jury's decision cannot be questioned. As I understand it, only matters of law or matters of redress may be.

And I can't see any reason they should be questioned. Apple had valid patents, enforced them, and won.
I can. Because to me it's fairly obvious that they didn't really spent much thought on it. How else could they manage to get these huge mistakes into it where they contradict themselves? Again, deciding on over 700 question in such a very short time, then have it done right before the weekend, looks more like "duh, let's roll some dice and get it over with, weekend is coming!" to me.

To quote something from here:

Quote:
UPDATE (7:04 PM): Here’s the thing, ladies and gentlemen of the Apple v. Samsung jury: It would take me more than three days to understand all the terms in the verdict! Much less come to a legally binding decision on all of these separate issues. Did you guys just flip a coin?
And when an actual lawyer says that, it should give you something to think about.

Oh, and also as said: The judge denied Samsung to present important evidence to the jury. And not only once, but several times. The jury simply didn't know the whole story.

Greetings,

Chris

ETA: Check out the two updates to this recent article on Groklaw:

Quote:
Apple said they owned patents, but we were debating about the prior art [about the same technology that Samsung said existed before the iPhone debuted]. [Velvin Hogan] was jury foreman. He had experience. He owned patents himself. In the beginning the debate was heated, but it was still civil. Hogan holds patents, so he took us through his experience. After that it was easier. After we debated that first patent -- what was prior art --because we had a hard time believing there was no prior art, that there wasn't something out there before Apple.

"In fact we skipped that one," Ilagan continued, "so we could go on faster. It was bogging us down." ...
The appeal will be very interesting.

Last edited by Christian Klippel; 25th August 2012 at 01:08 PM.
Christian Klippel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2012, 02:11 PM   #376
Christian Klippel
Master Poster
 
Christian Klippel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Ruhr Area in Germany
Posts: 2,153
Uh, ohh... This gets funnier by the minute. Just read on Groklaw the following gem from the jury foreman:

Quote:
"We wanted to make sure the message we sent was not just a slap on the wrist," Hogan said. "We wanted to make sure it was sufficiently high to be painful, but not unreasonable."
They really should have read the jury instructions. Because there it says:

Quote:
The amount of those damages must be adequate to compensate the patent holder for the infringement. A damages award should put the patent holder in approximately the financial position it would have been in had the infringement not occurred, but in no event may the damages award be less than a reasonable royalty. You should keep in mind that the damages you award are meant to compensate the patent holder and not to punish an infringer.
So, we have a jury foreman that explains stuff to the jury that is not in evidence, but his own experiences instead. We have a jury that completely skipped the question of prior art, as one juror admitted. We have a jury that contradicted itself in their first version of the verdict. We have jurors who claim to have legal experience, etc., and from what we can read it seems like they had this knowledge influence them, which it shouldn't. We have the jury foreman who just admitted that they wanted to come up with something that amounts to a punishment ("...not just a slap on the wrist", "...wanted to make sure it was sufficiently high to be painful..."), going clearly against the jury instructions. Oh, yes, those instructions that they couldn't be bothered to read in the first place, as they have admitted.

Seriously, i can't see how that jury's ruling can hold up. This thing has "mistrial" written all over it.

Greetings,

Chris
Christian Klippel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2012, 03:11 PM   #377
BenBurch
Gatekeeper of The Left
 
BenBurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one.
Posts: 35,297
What a jury SAYS is never considered.
__________________
For what doth it profit a man, to fix one bug, but crash the system?
BenBurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2012, 03:23 PM   #378
Christian Klippel
Master Poster
 
Christian Klippel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Ruhr Area in Germany
Posts: 2,153
Originally Posted by BenBurch View Post
What a jury SAYS is never considered.
I'm sorry, but i don't get what you try to say here. If what a jury says is never considered, then why have a jury at all?

And then, if from what they say after the trial it becomes clear that they not only ignored the instructions, but violated them, their findings are still supposed to be OK? I can't believe that this is what you want to say. Because that would lead to the situation that a jury could rule in some way, and later say "well, we simply didn't like party X, so we piled upon them" and it would be fine.

Really, here the jury allowed themselves to be influenced by the experiences of the foreman. Instead of reading the instructions, they didnt refer to them. They never asked the judge for clarification on something. Instead they let the foreman, who is a patent owner, explain to them how it should be.

They _completely_ ignored the question of prior art, because "it bogged them down". Instead they followed whatever the foreman told them about that topic. They simply ignored the instructions.

Even worse, that foreman admitted that they wanted to punish Samsung, which is in gross violation of the instructions.

And all that should not be considered?

Greetings,

Chris
Christian Klippel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2012, 03:27 PM   #379
Fast Eddie B
Master Poster
 
Fast Eddie B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Mineral Bluff, GA
Posts: 2,045
Originally Posted by Christian Klippel View Post
I'm sorry, but i don't get what you try to say here. If what a jury says is never considered, then why have a jury at all?
I think he means apart from the verdict(s).

Then again, if a juror said, "I voted for Apple because I was promised money to do so", I think the verdict might well be thrown out and a mistrial declared.

So, what a juror says may matter, depending on its import.
Fast Eddie B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2012, 03:37 PM   #380
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 67,665
Originally Posted by Christian Klippel View Post
...snip...
Seriously, i can't see how that jury's ruling can hold up. This thing has "mistrial" written all over it.

Greetings,

Chris
In regards to juries the USA is quite different to the UK, in the UK talking about how they reached their decision is a big no-no. Can a trial be appealed based on what the jurists say afterwards (not meaning if something illegal came to light - that's a different kettle of fish)? Strictly speaking in the UK a jury could just toss a coin to make their decision and that would still be binding.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2012, 03:37 PM   #381
Christian Klippel
Master Poster
 
Christian Klippel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Ruhr Area in Germany
Posts: 2,153
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie B View Post
I think he means apart from the verdict(s).

Then again, if a juror said, "I voted for Apple because I was promised money to do so", I think the verdict might well be thrown out and a mistrial declared.

So, what a juror says may matter, depending on its import.
OK. So, what do you think (or know), what importance does it have if a juror and the foreman basically admit to have violated the jury instructions? Because from how i understand what these two people said, that's pretty much what they admitted to have done.

Greetings,

Chris
Christian Klippel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2012, 03:44 PM   #382
Christian Klippel
Master Poster
 
Christian Klippel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Ruhr Area in Germany
Posts: 2,153
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
In regards to juries the USA is quite different to the UK, in the UK talking about how they reached their decision is a big no-no. Can a trial be appealed based on what the jurists say afterwards (not meaning if something illegal came to light - that's a different kettle of fish)? Strictly speaking in the UK a jury could just toss a coin to make their decision and that would still be binding.
And that bolded part is pretty much what i'm thinking about. To me it reads that the jury not only ignored the instructions, but violated them. The foreman admitted to making it a punishment, which they aren't allowed to do. One juror admitted that the foreman told them about his experience with patents (as he has one) and that they followed that line, instead of the instructions, evidence and asking the judge about those matters (which, from i read from the instructions, is what they ought to have done instead). It is admitted that they basically ignored the issue of prior art because it bogged them down.

To me that makes a rather fishy impression, and it makes me wonder if that is legal. Add to that the contradictions they had in their first verdict, which _really_ makes it look like they just randomly threw numbers together instead of caring about their duty.

Greetings,

Chris
Christian Klippel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2012, 03:49 PM   #383
BenBurch
Gatekeeper of The Left
 
BenBurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one.
Posts: 35,297
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
In regards to juries the USA is quite different to the UK, in the UK talking about how they reached their decision is a big no-no. Can a trial be appealed based on what the jurists say afterwards (not meaning if something illegal came to light - that's a different kettle of fish)? Strictly speaking in the UK a jury could just toss a coin to make their decision and that would still be binding.
Thanks! Was napping so didn't answer promptly.
__________________
For what doth it profit a man, to fix one bug, but crash the system?
BenBurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2012, 03:50 PM   #384
BenBurch
Gatekeeper of The Left
 
BenBurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one.
Posts: 35,297
Originally Posted by Christian Klippel View Post
And that bolded part is pretty much what i'm thinking about. To me it reads that the jury not only ignored the instructions, but violated them.

...
The only illegality that will matter isn if one of them were externally influenced.

Period.

In a criminal matter, you can even decide to pretend the law doesn't exist and rule to acquit, and your verdict as a jury is still valid.
__________________
For what doth it profit a man, to fix one bug, but crash the system?
BenBurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2012, 03:57 PM   #385
Christian Klippel
Master Poster
 
Christian Klippel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Ruhr Area in Germany
Posts: 2,153
Originally Posted by BenBurch View Post
The only illegality that will matter isn if one of them were externally influenced.
Like a foreman bringing in his own patent experiences as a patent holder, influencing the jury with that instead of following the instructions and/or asking the judge?

Greetings,

Chris
Christian Klippel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2012, 04:47 PM   #386
OnlyTellsTruths
 
OnlyTellsTruths's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 7,905
Originally Posted by BenBurch View Post
The only illegality that will matter isn if one of them were externally influenced.

Period.

I'm pretty sure that isn't true. I know it is limited, but there are a few other things besides influence.
__________________
________________________
OnlyTellsTruths is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2012, 04:49 PM   #387
OnlyTellsTruths
 
OnlyTellsTruths's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 7,905
Originally Posted by Christian Klippel View Post
Next, the jury foreman said that the jurors reached a decision, and they did not need the jury instructions to do so. Last but not least they made two extreme mistakes in their findings, where they contradicted themselves. First they found that the Galaxy Tab 10.1 did not infringe, but then awarded about 200k in damages to Apple for that. That also happened for the Intercept, for which they initially awarded 2 million in damages.
Wow, that's some devastating stuff. Apple couldn't have had a more favorable jury.
__________________
________________________
OnlyTellsTruths is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2012, 06:29 PM   #388
AvalonXQ
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 11,831
Originally Posted by BenBurch View Post
The jury's decision cannot be questioned. As I understand it, only matters of law or matters of redress may be.
No, jury verdicts can be questioned on appeal. The standard is just higher. Anything debatable is left to the jury, and the only things that can be overturned are where no "reasonable jury" could have ruled that way.
AvalonXQ is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2012, 06:35 PM   #389
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 14,773
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
In regards to juries the USA is quite different to the UK, in the UK talking about how they reached their decision is a big no-no. Can a trial be appealed based on what the jurists say afterwards (not meaning if something illegal came to light - that's a different kettle of fish)? Strictly speaking in the UK a jury could just toss a coin to make their decision and that would still be binding.
I remember that one jury in the UK used a ouija board to come to their decision. I think the guy who was convicted for murder, as a result, won a re-trial.

In this case, I spoke to Steve Jobs by ouija board and he admitted Samsung didn't copy anything but Apple copied Samsung so I will buy Samsung from now on.
angrysoba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th August 2012, 11:20 PM   #390
BenBurch
Gatekeeper of The Left
 
BenBurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one.
Posts: 35,297
Originally Posted by Christian Klippel View Post
Like a foreman bringing in his own patent experiences as a patent holder, influencing the jury with that instead of following the instructions and/or asking the judge?

Greetings,

Chris
As I understand it, that wouldn't be sufficient. Everybody brings things into the jury room, in fact, you hope they do. A jury of dunces would not yield just results.
__________________
For what doth it profit a man, to fix one bug, but crash the system?
BenBurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th August 2012, 02:43 AM   #391
Christian Klippel
Master Poster
 
Christian Klippel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Ruhr Area in Germany
Posts: 2,153
Originally Posted by BenBurch View Post
As I understand it, that wouldn't be sufficient. Everybody brings things into the jury room, in fact, you hope they do. A jury of dunces would not yield just results.
Somehow i have a hard time believing that in this case. If it really goes that way in this case, it would be really a shame.

As i read it, the jury was initially wondering about what prior art existed, and thus were considering it. Then the foreman comes in and tells them about _his_ experience, not about the facts of the case at hand. After that they turned around and, i quote:

Quote:
"In fact we skipped that one," Ilagan continued, "so we could go on faster. It was bogging us down." ...
So they ignored all that, simply based on what the foreman told them. They did not consult with the jury instructions, they did not ask the judge. I can imagine how that went on, judging from discussions about patents in online forums with people who are involved in that patent mess.

Combined with the foreman's statement that they wanted to "make sure it was sufficiently high to be painful", it looks like someone got an axe to grind, led the jury to ignore things and use his ideas instead and succeeded with that.

Oh, and it seems they borked up even more stuff, from what i read in this short article, and from other posters over at Groklaw report. Seems they did award damages based on design patent stuff for devices that are quite far away from that design stuff, while awarding nothing for devices that come really close to those patents.

The more i read about it the more it looks like a rushed decision, basically forced to go the way it did by the patent-holding foreman. I really can't believe that this will get a pass. I guess we will see what happens about that in the next days, and what will come up in the appeals.

Oh, and happy B'day Ben.

Greetings,

Chris
Christian Klippel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th August 2012, 04:44 AM   #392
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 14,773
Yes, happy birthday Ben Burch!
angrysoba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th August 2012, 07:48 AM   #393
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 67,665
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
Yes, happy birthday Ben Burch!
Be careful that's a breach of copyright!
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th August 2012, 07:49 AM   #394
AvalonXQ
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 11,831
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Be careful that's a breach of copyright!
No, it's not.
AvalonXQ is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th August 2012, 08:23 AM   #395
Fast Eddie B
Master Poster
 
Fast Eddie B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Mineral Bluff, GA
Posts: 2,045
Originally Posted by AvalonXQ View Post
No, it's not.
Let's have an argument!
Fast Eddie B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th August 2012, 08:40 AM   #396
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 67,665
Originally Posted by AvalonXQ View Post
No, it's not.

Jokedict
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th August 2012, 09:02 AM   #397
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
 
WildCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 54,431
Originally Posted by Christian Klippel View Post
I can. Because to me it's fairly obvious that they didn't really spent much thought on it. How else could they manage to get these huge mistakes into it where they contradict themselves?
Judge Koh has ordered the jury back on Monday, and told them to resolve these discrepancies in red ink on the verdict.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...,3967633.story
WildCat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th August 2012, 09:03 AM   #398
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 67,665
Originally Posted by WildCat View Post
Judge Koh has ordered the jury back on Monday, and told them to resolve these discrepancies in red ink on the verdict.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...,3967633.story
Now that is interesting, I take it that it is also quite unusual?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th August 2012, 10:10 AM   #399
BenBurch
Gatekeeper of The Left
 
BenBurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one.
Posts: 35,297
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Now that is interesting, I take it that it is also quite unusual?
Yes, but I have seen it once before.
__________________
For what doth it profit a man, to fix one bug, but crash the system?
BenBurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th August 2012, 10:49 AM   #400
Christian Klippel
Master Poster
 
Christian Klippel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Ruhr Area in Germany
Posts: 2,153
Originally Posted by WildCat View Post
Judge Koh has ordered the jury back on Monday, and told them to resolve these discrepancies in red ink on the verdict.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...,3967633.story
From what i know they already did that. That is, gave out new figures for the damages.

Greetings,

Chris

ETA: In the article on Groklaw, that i linked to earlier:

Quote:
In two instances, results were crazily contradictory, and the judge had to have the jury go back and fix the goofs. As a result the damages award was reduced to $1,049,343,540, down from $1,051,855,000. For just one example, the jury had said one device didn't infringe, but then they awarded Apple $2 million for inducement. In another they awarded a couple of hundred thousand for a device they'd ruled didn't infringe at all.
ETA2: Oh, and even there they messed it up. The first amended total was 1,049,343,293. Then they corrected that to 1,049,343,540. However, if you add up the numbers from their breakdown, it comes out as 1,049,423,540.

That's what you get for rushing things out without thinking just to punish someone, i guess.

Last edited by Christian Klippel; 26th August 2012 at 11:00 AM.
Christian Klippel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Computers and the Internet

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:58 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.