|
Title: Fast ruling in Apple case because of competent jurors... "experts" surprised. Post by: Link on August 25, 2012, 03:01:01 PM Apple just won a $1 billion judgement against Samsung.
Quote from: in.reuters.com Hogan said jurors were able to complete their deliberations in less than three days -- much faster than legal experts had predicted -- because a few had engineering and legal experience, which helped with the complex issues in play. Once they determined Apple's patents were valid, jurors evaluated every single device separately, he said. Link. (http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/08/25/us-apple-samsung-juror-idINBRE87O09U20120825) What a concept. Actually have some competent people on a jury. Title: Re: Fast ruling in Apple case because of competent jurors... "experts" surprised. Post by: LastVoter on August 25, 2012, 08:06:01 PM Incompetent Jurors, they awarded money to one of the more evil corporations in the world.
Title: Re: Fast ruling in Apple case because of competent jurors... "experts" surprised. Post by: Franzl on August 26, 2012, 03:56:03 PM Incompetent Jurors, they awarded money to one of the more evil corporations in the world. In what way, if true, is that relevant? Title: Re: Fast ruling in Apple case because of competent jurors... "experts" surprised. Post by: Vosem on August 26, 2012, 08:40:54 PM Incompetent Jurors, they awarded money to one of the more evil corporations in the world. Oh, my god, a corporation! How awful! Title: Re: Fast ruling in Apple case because of competent jurors... "experts" surprised. Post by: Beet on August 26, 2012, 08:41:45 PM More to the point, they awarded money for things like rounded squares. Apple invented rounded squares? There needs to be a better balance between intellectual property and common sense / competition.
Title: Re: Fast ruling in Apple case because of competent jurors... "experts" surprised. Post by: Bacon King on August 27, 2012, 03:06:12 AM More to the point, they awarded money for things like rounded squares. Apple invented rounded squares? There needs to be a better balance between intellectual property and common sense / competition. The patents at question in this trial actually aren't so simple. Apple owns a patent for a rectangular phone with rounded corners, a large and flat face, a touch screen display that covers the front, a bezel surround, a home button located at the bottom middle, etc. Apple didn't sue because Samsung made phones with rounded corners, but because they allege that the Samsung phones in question borrow far too heavily on this "overall design." Now, I'll definitely agree on your last point, though. There are some ridiculous things that have been given patents out there- like, for example, using a stick as a fetch toy for a dog (http://www.google.com/patents?id=hhYJAAAAEBAJ). |