|
| Authored by: arnotsmith on Tuesday, May 22 2012 @ 01:43 AM EDT |
It takes three or four years to make a programmer from a high school graduate.
It would take even longer to train someone to understand enough law to interpret
patent language.
I have been coding for 50 years, but I don't really understand the distinctions
that are being argued about here; and I have never been able to make any
connection between a software patent description and reality.
Can a jury say "We don't understand any of this, can we go home now
please?"?
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, May 22 2012 @ 12:01 PM EDT |
When you say
The jury has to begin in a state of technical
ignorance.
I have to agree that was a criterion of the jury
selection. But why is that? I used to think it was because the lawyers didn't
want anyone on the jury who could see through their lawyerly BS. But now I have
to wonder. If you've got a good case, why insist the jury be technically
untutored, which can only take your good case and make it a crap shoot?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: YurtGuppy on Tuesday, May 22 2012 @ 12:47 PM EDT |
<pre>
Function burden_of_proof(big_$$_patent: X)
{
if ( jury_too_dumb(X) || patent_too_obscure(X))
{
decision = NO_INFRINGEMENT;
}
}
</pre>
<pre> tag doesn't work arg!
<
---
a small fish in an even smaller pond[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
