If this is about the
BBC
interview?
As I understand it he avoids both questions about the
validity
of
the Samsungs patents and suggests that he had time to analyze and
compare the source code. Did Apple published that code so it
could be copied
by Samsung?
That looks as defending the worst from of software patents,
not
protecting what is does, but really the lines of code. Just
imagine that
you have to check tons of patent papers before you
can type a few lines of
code.
The fear that Google at a certain point had that there may be
a
problem with the Samsung designs is mentioned. But was it not the
job of the
jury to check if what Samsung did was legal without
depending of the opinion of
Google?
The tone is a little bit like a politician or an official
spokesman of a company defending the official point of view. At
the one hand
defending specific views, on the other hand trying
to suggest there is no harm
done, the critic is a hype, things
should be
put in perspective. After that
verdict with that motivation? Is
this still the role of a jury foreman? [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
| 
