Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines

ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

Where is the court's neutral expert?? (with lay definition of stack, and relationship to memory) | 286 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

Where is the court's neutral expert?? (with lay definition of stack, and relationship to memory)

Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, May 21 2012 @ 07:05 PM EDT

I posted the above post, in a moment of despair, and I didn't really expect
PJ to quote it, so....

I must say that the current situation is not the jury's fault, they have been
asked to wade through some very technical subjects, and they appear to
be trying their best to discharge their responsibility. I also think Judge
Alsup has mostly done a good job of keeping things on track.

The problem is the system: junk patents presumed valid, dueling experts,
no way for the jury to ask for and receive basic factual information that is
needed to reach the correct conclusions. No independent technical expert
to point out to the Judge when legal arguments are inconsistent with the
real-world technology they purport to be about.

I don't know how to fix it, but its clear that the legal system is not well-
equipped to deal with this kind of case, and if they persist in thinking that
they are, I fear they will sooner or later do enormous collateral damage to
the industry.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )