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

And who, pray tell, were the "tech savy jurors"? | 543 comments | Create New Account

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

Of course tech savvy jurors didn't believe Oracle

Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 23 2012 @ 03:16 PM EDT

I'm just pleased they outweighed the non savvy ones.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Of course tech savvy jurors didn't believe Oracle - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, May 23 2012 @ 04:01 PM EDT

And who, pray tell, were the "tech savy jurors"?

Authored by: Tkilgore on Thursday, May 24 2012 @ 01:06 AM EDT

Seriously. Yesterday the only thing I was reading was that the patent claims
were completely above the head of the jurors, who had been picked for being the
very opposite of "tech savvy" and were hopelessly lost in a swamp.

Under the circumstances, I find a statement to the effect that the more tech
savvy jurors were more in favor of openness to be rather remarkable regardless
of the source. The fact that it was Mr. Jury Foreman who allegedly said it is
even more strange. What did he actually mean?

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

And who, pray tell, were the "tech savy jurors"? - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, May 24 2012 @ 06:13 AM EDT
And who, pray tell, were the "tech savy jurors"? - Authored by: PJ on Thursday, May 24 2012 @ 12:02 PM EDT

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 )