|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, August 26 2012 @ 09:52 AM EDT |
As far as I can tell, the jury system was created in order to protect against
feudal overlords handing out random punishment through the court system.
More systems are in place for making sure judgement is fair and the law is
applied equally to everyone. Hailing from a civil law country, I am horrified by
juries, plea bargaining and an adversarial system.
Even so, I think what information has surfaced about how the jury came to its
conclusion convinced me this was a mistrial, even by common law's own standards.
The foreman is obviously biased by the 7 years he spent getting a software
patent, and being taught how to obscure the fact that what was being patented is
not patentable subject matter. He then used his pro-software patent views and
rhetorical tricks to defend Apple's software patents.
Furthermore, the jury mistook having identical features with infringing Apple's
patents and used a warning from Google about design similarity as evidence that
1) having a similar design is illegal, 2) the designs are too similar and 3) the
design was copied. There's quite a bit of a stretch there and it appears only
feasible to make that stretch if you already found for Apple in your heart.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
