Comments on: Video: Jury Foreman in Apple vs. Samsung Opens Up About Reaching Verdict

By: chilltech

chilltech — Tue, 02 Oct 2012 15:46:00 +0000

I now this is really late but, I think that might have been true years ago, but with all the law shows, out there, I think that the average person has some idea what the difference between murder and manslaughter are. Even if it isn’t the textbook version of them.

By: Tony Thomas

Tony Thomas — Mon, 03 Sep 2012 04:31:00 +0000

This guy should have been disqualified from being a juror. His ahah moment was by thinking how he could enforce a patent which is biassed to one side. Instead, he should have been thinking “how can a developer design ANYTHING to meet a clear function without being totally hindered by a totally unreasonable combination of inappropriate grants, naive jurors, and lawyers cashed up to record levels.” As an implementor, rather than a speculator, he may have had a different ahah?

By: AdamSchuster

AdamSchuster — Thu, 30 Aug 2012 21:40:00 +0000

That’s a very interesting article. It still doesn’t change that the jury foreperson told the jury they could ignore the prior art, since it couldn’t run on apple’s system. I didn’t hear the evidence as it related to the prior art, but, if Samsung used that as prior art, they must have thought that it was relevant to the claims in the patent. All I’ve seen of the Diamond Touch system is what was in the youtube video. I don’t know if it’s implementation is the same as Apple’s or not. But, it would have been nice if the jury had looked at it to see if it did invalidate apple’s patent.

By: frankandsimple

frankandsimple — Thu, 30 Aug 2012 21:01:00 +0000

http://www.bgr.com/2012/08/30/apple-patent-analysis-google-android/

By: MonkeyWork

MonkeyWork — Thu, 30 Aug 2012 20:55:00 +0000

Hey everybody, I want to be famous!

My book about the trial is coming soon. Thanks America!

By: Jellybellys

Jellybellys — Thu, 30 Aug 2012 16:28:00 +0000

Is she single?

By: frankandsimple

frankandsimple — Thu, 30 Aug 2012 15:18:00 +0000

I am sure it is not as simple as that. The crux of the issue being what really can be classified as “invention” in prior art.. and what really was actually done by Apple and whether it can be classified as “invention” as applicable to smart phones and the way it was implemented. Obviously the US patent system and the jurors saw it in favor of Apple being the inventor here and not prior art.
It’s interesting.. we’ll see how the appeal process goes.

By: Jonathan Boyd

Jonathan Boyd — Wed, 29 Aug 2012 18:34:00 +0000

Here’s some reading:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prior_art#Usage_in_litigation
Key sentence: “If an invention has been described in the prior art, a patent on that invention is not valid.” Several of the patents that Samsung is accused of infringing have prior art that existed prior to Apple’s patent applications (which means the patent itself is invalid). Samsung can sell all of the phones they want using slide-to-unlock in Denmark because the court rightly realized that the Apple patent was invalid (as many of the patents involved in this suit will be on appeal).

By: frankandsimple

frankandsimple — Wed, 29 Aug 2012 18:22:00 +0000

You are not being unreasonable. I will give you that.

By: frankandsimple

frankandsimple — Wed, 29 Aug 2012 18:21:00 +0000

I am disrespectful to people who are not respectful. If I call names it is a reaction to something.

By: Asten

Asten — Wed, 29 Aug 2012 17:36:00 +0000

Yeah, but that a) isn’t yet a patent, b) isn’t samsung’s pending patent.

By: Asten

Asten — Wed, 29 Aug 2012 17:34:00 +0000

politicians, period.

By: Asten

Asten — Wed, 29 Aug 2012 17:31:00 +0000

I’d destroy it in a comical and creative fashion on video, and post it on youtube.

By: Asten

Asten — Wed, 29 Aug 2012 17:31:00 +0000

The iPhone?

By: BroRob

BroRob — Wed, 29 Aug 2012 17:05:00 +0000

Ah and yet you result to calling me names like “silly girl” and “cowboy” while trolling this post ALL day yesterday. You have proved your point sir, I have been bullied in to your viewpoint. Now if you can excuse me, I’m off to return my Android powered phone for the far more innovative iPhone.