|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 28 2012 @ 12:48 PM EDT |
He just exposes his limits of comprehension. That's human.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 28 2012 @ 02:04 PM EDT |
that the software was not interchangeable. "I wasn't confused, but there
was a few jurors who were confused." Here is my list of jurors. Anyone have
more recent info?
Velvin Hogan 67, EE, (2 patents, +1 pending)
Manuel Ilagan, 59, Mechanical engineer
?, 24
..homemaker
,,bicycle shop mgr
,,US Navy veteran
?
?
?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: gdeinsta on Tuesday, August 28 2012 @ 08:05 PM EDT |
Thanks, anonymous O.P. That's definitely it, starting at 2:57. The jury
foreman says he concluded that the '460 patent was not invalidated by prior art
because the prior software couldn't run on the same processor or vice-versa.
Then he says he took that thesis into the jury the next day and sold the
others.
BTW the
site
is BBC but the video is Bloomberg.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|