decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
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

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


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:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
I admire that expert's always upbeat opinion | 278 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
I admire that expert's always upbeat opinion
Authored by: PolR on Wednesday, June 20 2012 @ 04:47 PM EDT
What could be appealed at the Federal Circuit? The jury ruled the patents not
infringed.

Copyrights issues will be appealed at the 9th circuit, isn't it?

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Who is "he?" Florian Mueller?
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 20 2012 @ 06:41 PM EDT
Please write the comments so they can be understood. Just referring to someone
as "he" without context is very confusing. I had to check if someone
other that PJ wrote the article or if mirrorslap (don't know mirrorslap's sex)
wrote what was quoted.

Florian Mueller is not some sort of great supernatural being. There is no reason
to act as if you are unworthy to even say his name. Acting like he isn't a
normal person makes it seem as if he is more important than he actually is. Of
course, that's what he wants people to think, though.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Yes, Always the case.
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 20 2012 @ 10:56 PM EDT
Wikipedia:
In most U.S. states, and in U.S. federal courts, parties before the court are allowed one appeal as of right. This means that a party who is unsatisfied with the outcome of a trial may bring an appeal to contest that outcome.
The fact that the rules have a rule called "Appeal as of Right" implies that you have the right of appeal. That doesn't mean they won't take one look at it and say "Frivolous!", but you at least get that.

What is not automatic is an En Banc Determination, which means more than a three judge panel or consideration by the US Supreme Court (not sure about the right to an aural presentation).

As a practical matter, any appeal of this one is going to get very serious consideration and very possibly (IMO & IANAL) an En Banc consideration if it's requested. Judge Alsup said:
No court of appeals has addressed the copyrightability of APIs, much less their structure, sequence and organization. Nor has any district court.
In other words, he was creating new law there. He was setting precedent that other judges will be expected to follow. That deserves someone looking over his shoulder. He expects it:
...the actual facts, as found herein by the judge, will be set forth below for the benefit of the court of appeals.
He clearly expected that the decision was going to be gone over with a fine tooth comb, so he tried to limit the chances that there would be a problem if that happened.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

I admire that expert's always upbeat opinion
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 21 2012 @ 12:20 PM EDT
It does not really matter all that much whether the federal circuit is patent-friendly or not. The patent case has been ripped to shreds quite carefully. Especially if you are patent-friendly, you don't want a factually defective case to get more exposure than it already did.

It would be rather ridiculous to claim that the jury did a sub-par job.

I don't see much hope for consideration in appeal except for the copyright angle of the case. The structure, sequence, organisation argument is rather novel. Whether or not it is novel because it is so ridiculous nobody else dared bringing it so far does not matter: the ruling establishes new ground and thus is worthy of reexamination/verification.

I don't consider it likely that this will change the result either, but nevertheless I expect that to be the angle that the appeals court will spend most of its effort on.

[ 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 )