|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, July 11 2013 @ 02:37 PM EDT |
"Apparently, Samsung read the claims and decided NOT to make an argument
that their products did not include instructions for testing the position of the
edge."
A argument worthy of a lawyer and an unknowing and obtuse one at that.
Nobody test the position of the edge because that is not the sensible way of
doing it. If Apple is practicing their own patent they are more silly then
allowed.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: NigelWhitley on Thursday, July 11 2013 @ 05:14 PM EDT |
I'm not sure whether you think that calling someone obtuse is the same as
rebutting the points they make but, for future reference, it isn't.
You display an astonishing lack of understanding of the process here, both in
terms of the burden of proof and of the claim construction on which the parties
confer pre-trial. Unlike you, I'm not sure what argument Apple made but your
description of the process (IMHO,IANAL) is fundamentally flawed. The burden of
proof is on the plaintiff (Apple) to show how the defendant's (Samsung's)
products infringe. Apple didn't get to simply make a blanket allegation and then
Samsung had to prove their innocence : that's not the way things work in a
criminal court and it's not the case here.
So that's paragraph 3 disposed of and as for paragraph 4 : the reason why that
nonsense didn't happen is because stuff like that might happen in a bad novel or
on TV but this case was in a real court.
Paragraph 1 suggests you have insight into the legal process for patent cases
and offer an opinion based on that insight. But paragraphs 3 and 4 have amply
demonstrated that cannot be true so what we actually have is your legal opinion,
based on neither experience nor training, on what a defendant would do.
Paragraph 2 implies that Samsung decided on their defense strategy solely or
largely on their own reading of the claims. It makes no mention of any further
discussion between the parties or rulings by the court which would have had an
impact on that strategy. Yet we know those discussions took place and that the
claim construction, which is perhaps the most crucial part of a patent trial
since it decides what the plaintiff will have to prove, took many hours. So
you've taken two events in isolation, ignored the critical events that happened
in between including their effects on the process, thus making it appear that
Apple had no input to the process and the decision was taken by Samsung in a
vacuum. Using such an approach one could say that, apparently, white men came to
America and freed the black slaves. Suffice to say that it is rather less than a
complete picture.
For someone who seems to place such store by simple reading, I humbly suggest
that you read about the real patent litigation process before making further
strident and ill-informed statements about it. Sorry to be so blunt.
-------------------
Nigel Whitley[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, July 11 2013 @ 05:21 PM EDT |
Samsung's lawyers had to argue against the claims, as presented by Apple's
lawyers to the court.
In an ideal situation, Samsung's lawyers would have been able to demolish both
the claim construction presented by Apple to the court, and the claim
construction presented by Apple to the USPTO. But since the court did not allow
Samsung enough to time to do both....[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|