Apple drops appeal of $21.7 million OPTi patent suit

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 29
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,665member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by rhyde View Post


    That is a high-tech area. The judges actually know a thing or two about tech. That's why high-tech patent cases get filed there all the time. If you actually have a case (and OPTi certainly did in this case), it's best to present it before knowledgeable people. Now as to the qualifications of the jury...



    Well, that would account for informed rulings from the bench. However, it seems that "East Texas" and "patent litigation friendly" are generally thought to be nearly synonymous, which is another matter entirely. Not seeing a lot of patent cases come before San Mateo County courts, and that's Silicon Valley, so there must be more to it than just "tech savvy."



    Unless the idea is that most high tech patent claims have merit, hence what I assume to be disproportionate findings? Because if that's not the case, then some prior notion of appropriate outcome is in play, and that's not really OK. Moreover, it's not OK in a way that I would have thought would have invited scrutiny, but apparently not.
  • Reply 22 of 29
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    Well, that would account for informed rulings from the bench. However, it seems that "East Texas" and "patent litigation friendly" are generally thought to be nearly synonymous, which is another matter entirely. Not seeing a lot of patent cases come before San Mateo County courts, and that's Silicon Valley, so there must be more to it than just "tech savvy."



    Unless the idea is that most high tech patent claims have merit, hence what I assume to be disproportionate findings? Because if that's not the case, then some prior notion of appropriate outcome is in play, and that's not really OK. Moreover, it's not OK in a way that I would have thought would have invited scrutiny, but apparently not.



    San Mateo County is known as 'the peninsula'... Mostly hills, not much in the way of valleys.

    You want Santa Clara County, where Apple/many other tech companies are and also known as Silicon Valley.



    But your point is still valid, and San Mateo is still a lot closer than East Texas.
  • Reply 23 of 29
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,665member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by oxygenhose View Post


    San Mateo County is known as 'the peninsula'... Mostly hills, not much in the way of valleys.

    You want Santa Clara County, where Apple/many other tech companies are and also known as Silicon Valley.



    But your point is still valid, and San Mateo is still a lot closer than East Texas.



    Duh. I'd just been down to Stanford, right on the county border, and apparently got that stuck in my head.
  • Reply 24 of 29
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ronbo View Post


    Not quite. When you win your case in a court with a national reputation for being fair and even-handed, it carries a certain weight. When you win your case in a court with a national reputation for being LESS THAN fair and even-handed, it DOESN'T carry that weight. It just doesn't.



    Only by your reckoning, which doesn't seem to come from any particular understanding of the law so much as from some stuff somebody said on the Internet.
  • Reply 25 of 29
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post


    Michael Moore, East Texas patent courts await your close attention. Please.



    Yes, because his stance of Cuba having better health care than the US was right on the mark. The guy is a bumbling idiot. Hope he dies of a heart attack.
  • Reply 26 of 29
    stompystompy Posts: 408member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    Well, that would account for informed rulings from the bench. However, it seems that "East Texas" and "patent litigation friendly" are generally thought to be nearly synonymous, which is another matter entirely. Not seeing a lot of patent cases come before San Mateo County courts, and that's Silicon Valley, so there must be more to it than just "tech savvy."



    Maybe someone from that area of Texas could comment, but nothing I've read points to "high-tech". Relatively small town, with a former patent-layer judge appointed in 1999. His methods, while unusual, seem to produce the results he believes in.



    It's an interesting microcosm.
  • Reply 27 of 29
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,665member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by stompy View Post


    Maybe someone from that area of Texas could comment, but nothing I've read points to "high-tech". Relatively small town, with a former patent-layer judge appointed in 1999. His methods, while unusual, seem to produce the results he believes in.



    It's an interesting microcosm.



    Thanks for the links, they leave me more mystified than ever. The story on the single patent friendly judge who has made a cottage industry for Marshall out of attracting patent trolls seems hard to explain. Aren't there judicial checks and balances that would reign in a judge who was clearly handing down wildly disproportionate decisions on a particular type of case? As the article states:



    Quote:

    About 70 percent of Ward's trials have resulted in victories for patent owners, the research company said. The national average is 23.5 percent.



    How is that not a red flag? Maybe I don't understand how litigation or judicial ruling work, but I would have thought that being that far off the curve would clearly indicate some factor in play other than the merits of the cases being heard, and that that would be frowned on.



    And it's not as if its something discovered by careful analysis of obscure data-- the freaking town is freaking famous for exactly this. I guess I'm also curious where the previous poster got the idea that the area is "high tech" and that that accounts for the number of cases heard, because I can't find anything about Marshall that suggests that. Being 90 miles from Dallas/Ft. Worth doesn't make it any more high tech than does Petaluma's proximity to San Jose.
  • Reply 28 of 29
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    Thanks for the links, they leave me more mystified than ever. The story on the single patent friendly judge who has made a cottage industry for Marshall out of attracting patent trolls seems hard to explain. Aren't there judicial checks and balances that would reign in a judge who was clearly handing down wildly disproportionate decisions on a particular type of case? As the article states:



    The first question I'd ask is, does this judge get overturned on appeal on a disproportional basis?



    Beware of getting in between dueling lawyers. Lest we forget, they are paid to be tireless advocates for whomever pays them. For instance, we are expected to the argument:



    Quote:

    ?Juries in East Texas, unlike those in Houston, Dallas or Austin, are much less likely to have a member with any technical training or education, which exacerbates the problem from the defense perspective, but makes East Texas federal courts an attractive venue for would-be plaintiffs, who know that the jury will, instead, gravitate toward softer or superficial issues that are difficult to predict.?



    ... on face value, but it leaves entirely unanswered the question of why such a makeup would favor either side in a highly technical dispute. Color me suspicious.
  • Reply 29 of 29
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by patent litigation View Post


    The recent Intellectual Ventures suits provide just one example showing that the NPE business model is fast becoming dominant in the world of IP. Thomas Edison held over 1,000 patents, but practiced none of them. He invented, which is what he did best, and let others manufacture products from his inventions. If an inventor cannot sue for patent infringement and recover damages, they why should anyone invent anything? Only vigorous patent enforcement rewards inventors for their inventions and incentivizes others to invent.



    I'm inclined to agree. The patent suits among various IT companies in the recent several years have really gotten out of hand. This suit is just a poster child of what can go wrong with the patent and the related patent court system.



    A broad based idea in general should not be accepted as a patent, with some exceptional cases. The actual techniques: algorithms, formal models, software implementation, hardware design should be the elements that are patentable, not some vague idea that anyone can daydream up. Perhaps it would be best if there were some patent application and enforcement moritorium, and a deep look into how the system might need to be reformed to bring up to modern standards that work for the IT industry.
Sign In or Register to comment.