Slashdot Mirror
How Apple v. Samsung Was Explained To the Jury
jfruh writes "10 jurors have been sworn in for the Apple v. Samsung case, which is at the heart of the ongoing patent disputes over the companies' smartphones. While most Slashdot readers are familiar with many of the facts of the case and the law, the jury is at least in theory supposed to be something of a blank slate. Thus, it's interesting to see the detailed instructions Judge Lucy Koh gave to the jury, covering everything from the differences between utility and design patents to how to measure the credibility of witnesses."
http://phandroid.com/2012/07/31/pre-iphone-design-concepts-add-weight-to-samsungs-defense-in-patent-trial/
"Don't Panic!"
I shudder to think what, say, the musical instrument market would look like today if the designs of cellos, violins, classical guitars, grand pianos, and countless other instruments with roughly equivalent shapes were similarly protected.
"In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
I don't know what his bias is, but the facts are that she granted an injunction against the sale of Samsung phones on the basis of a few very weak patents. The strongest of which, apparently, was a search function that could search both the local phone and the internet at the same time.
I am not optimistic about this case.