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

the "prior art" logic method | 484 comments | Create New Account

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

Jury foreman, freaked out as the "prior art" logic method, could invalidate his own patent. So?

Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 30 2012 @ 10:33 AM EDT

Do you have *any* evidence of anything like this happening? Any evidence that
the jury foreman has a patent suit in progress? Anything?

No?

Then stop besmirching his reputation simply because you don't like the decision
the *entire jury* came to.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

There Wouldn't Have to Be a Case - Authored by: Rodrin on Thursday, August 30 2012 @ 11:26 AM EDT
- Has anyone looked at jury foreman's patent, to see if it has "prior art" exposure? - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 30 2012 @ 11:46 AM EDT
  - Mr. Foreman? Is that you? - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 30 2012 @ 01:19 PM EDT
Jury foreman, freaked out - all questions marks in that post, asking questions, not a comment. - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 30 2012 @ 11:43 AM EDT
Jury foreman, freaked out as the "prior art" logic method, could invalidate his own patent. So? - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 30 2012 @ 12:41 PM EDT
- Jury foreman, freaked out as the "prior art" logic method, could invalidate his own patent. So? - Authored by: PJ on Thursday, August 30 2012 @ 12:57 PM EDT

the "prior art" logic method

Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, August 31 2012 @ 12:47 AM EDT

If the jury decision is allowed to stand with all the jury's public comments,
will the foreman's definition of prior art become the new USA legal standard?
I can see a lot of software patents, including Apple's, being side stepped by
using different hardware architectures.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

the "prior art" logic method - Authored by: PJ on Friday, August 31 2012 @ 01:38 AM 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 )