decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
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
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

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:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Judge wasn't an expert in the field | 217 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Ouch
Authored by: kuroshima on Tuesday, November 27 2012 @ 03:11 PM EST
As they say in my corner of the net, Boies got owned...

I say that Groklaw should be required reading for judges!

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

  • Ouch - Authored by: LocoYokel on Tuesday, November 27 2012 @ 08:02 PM EST
Ouch
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 27 2012 @ 03:35 PM EST
And they work so hard to filter out anyone on the jury who
might have the faintest idea what the case is actually about
- worked out fine in Apple v Samsung didn't it.

So in patent trials that have to go to a jury is it
essential that the members of the jury should no way be
'skilled in the art'.

These days I do ask people who I know have NO qualifications
in anything how to do X because I know they will have the
answer. Programming is so easy to pick up - if you have the
will and need to do so. It has been deliberately made as
easy as sticking bits of Lego together.

Take grep. What would the patent for that be then. A method
to identify a pattern of symbols in a plurality of inputs.
Or some such rubbish.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Or even just knowledgeable :)
Authored by: xtifr on Tuesday, November 27 2012 @ 03:52 PM EST

It might be a bit of a stretch to call the judge an expert. As he points out, RangeCheck is the sort of thing that a high-school student could probably write in five minutes. It hardly needs an expert.

It's one thing to present an argument that only an expert is likely to see through. It's another to present an argument that even an amateur with a moderate interest in the topic is going to be able to see through. That's where Boies really slipped up! :)

---
Do not meddle in the affairs of Wizards, for it makes them soggy and hard to light.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Ouch - but ...
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 27 2012 @ 05:30 PM EST
But just to play a bit of devil's advocate ...

The judge is doing the same thing that he advises jurors not to do ... introducing his own testimony from personal experience to the mix. The fact that he's right doesn't change what he's doing. The fact that he's right does make it appear a lot more sensible option than if he were spouting off incorrectly on something. But if (we discovered that) a juror had made this same statement ("they made a big deal about it but I could do it in less than five minutes so they're just puffing up its importance") I think we'd be looking at a situation a little greyer than but still similar to our jury foreman.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

When A Lawyer Isn't A hole In The Ground.....
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, November 28 2012 @ 07:28 AM EST
>>Having a judge who is expert in the field can really ruin a
lawyer's day

Judge to Lawyer: I do know enough about the difference
between an ass and a hole in the ground to know that you are
not a hole in the ground.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Judge wasn't an expert in the field
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, November 28 2012 @ 09:25 AM EST
The Judge was only about equivilent to a highschooler in the field (or only
needed to show that much, anyway).

The fact that that's all that's needed just makes the point even clearer.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

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 )