In theory, public opinion should be able to change the system, but given the corporatocracy we live in today, opinions are unlikely to have any real effect anytime soon. Juries on the other hand do have the power to have some real immediate impact. If the jury in this case had actually taken the time to more thoroughly examine the patents in question rather than hammering their way through the 700+ questions on the verdict form, it's possible they might have come to a different decision on the validity of the patents.
Juries do actually have the power to change the system by invalidating patents. If that happens often enough, we might see companies file fewer patents and fewer suits.Â
Apple v. Samsung jury foreman: only the ‘court of popular opinion’ can change the patent system
When the Apple v. Samsung jury handed in its $1.049 bilion verdict last week, the man that delivered the form itself was jury foreman Velvin Hogan. We recently spoke with the 67-year-old engineer,…
Post imported by Google+Blog for WordPress.
Well, they did not sacrifice it, they actually used it.
They changed the definition of prior-art. With Velvin Hogan as juror, any prior-art doesn't stand a chance, so start patenting everybody, he will make it worth your while.
Well, they did not sacrifice it, they actually used it.
They changed the definition of prior-art. With Velvin Hogan as juror, any prior-art doesn't stand a chance, so start patenting everybody, he will make it worth your while.
and how exactly will the jury "invalidate" patents?.. <wonders>