|
|
|
| Authored by: SilverWave on Sunday, October 07 2012 @ 11:06 PM EDT |
Yes! Because the whole point is that, by not mentioning the case, he has left
Samsung with a misleading impression.
If he had informed them of the case they would have had a chance to bump him
from the jury.
Denying them the information to make that decision could be the turning point in
getting a new fair trial.
---
RMS: The 4 Freedoms
0 run the program for any purpose
1 study the source code and change it
2 make copies and distribute them
3 publish modified versions
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: artp on Monday, October 08 2012 @ 01:30 AM EDT |
All Samsung had to do in voir dire was watch out for their
own interests. Apple was responsible for watching their own
behind. That is the way the game is played. Don't blame
Samsung, or Apple, or any other party for it. It just is.
Each party gets so many cuts, and often, there are more
jurors to cut than they are allowed. So sometimes neither
side gets what it wants.
But do believe that if a juror looks to be too biased, one
side or the other will cut them.
---
Userfriendly on WGA server outage:
When you're chained to an oar you don't think you should go down when the galley
sinks ?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
