The state of Texas has no control over this court. It is a Federal Court. The judges are appointed by the President. One judge in particular, T. John Ward seems to be a favorite for patent lawsuits. Patent lawsuit in that federal district have increased over 10 times what they were before he became a judge there. And the plaintiffs in his patent cases seem to win at a higher rate than the defendants compared to other district courts. Losers in patent cases can appeal to the Federal District Court of Appeals, and then on to the Supreme Court.
----
Hopefully, Texans did not expect to get this type of publicity because of a Federal appointment. Interested in the President that gave birth to these filings.
Glad there are levels of appeal to get a just decision, assuming the appeal costs justify the extra expense. Each case costs the defendants, and eventually the consumers, world wide. "Loser pays all expenses" should help reduce troll type claims.
We are talking about a country where you can buy a gun (legally) one day and shoot 6 people the next (including some politician, Giffords right?). It goes without saying that legal system you have there is pretty f'ed.
IMO you are a jerk.
Someone can buy a bat, car, rat poison and / or a million other things and kill people with them.
THINGS don't kill people. PEOPLE kill people with things.
Someone can buy a bat, car, rat poison and / or a million other things and kill people with them.
THINGS don't kill people. PEOPLE kill people with things.
I have to agree with the last 2 sentences (I know not if you are an idiot).
Actually, for handguns, you have to wait a week. Also, a background check is done (little good that did in this case) but those can take several days. Not quite as much of a "run in, throw your cash down and you are out on your wild killing spree". Not much different you say - it does try to weed out those felons, registered crazies etc. However the gun law stops no one from buying from an acquaintance, criminal, etc. or someone else buying the gun for them (straw man purchase). This is the same problem everywhere, law or not. Those that want guns get them. Period.
Funny how in each and every one of these threads so many legal experts come out of the woodwork.
Sure, but still, I'll ask the same question I asked a few patent threads ago: if the the outcomes of patent cases before this particular judge's court are clearly out of line with the national norm (and apparently they are, else why the fondness for filing in this district?), how is that not evidence of judicial misconduct?
Not only am I not a lawyer, I have no earthly idea how this sort of thing is generally regarded, but I would have thought statistically significant variance from average outcomes would at least raise an eyebrow or two. Unless the theory is that you only go to Texas if you have a solid case to make, which doesn't really make much sense.
Sure, but still, I'll ask the same question I asked a few patent threads ago: if the the outcomes of patent cases before this particular judge's court are clearly out of line with the national norm (and apparently they are, else why the fondness for filing in this district?), how is that not evidence of judicial misconduct?
Not only am I not a lawyer, I have no earthly idea how this sort of thing is generally regarded, but I would have thought statistically significant variance from average outcomes would at least raise an eyebrow or two. Unless the theory is that you only go to Texas if you have a solid case to make, which doesn't really make much sense.
I asked some patent threads back if this court was overturned routinely on appeal. Not that anyone knows the answer, but it doesn't stop them from expressing the strongly held opinions that it's court of choice for "patent whores."
I asked some patent threads back if this court was overturned routinely on appeal. Not that anyone knows the answer, but it doesn't stop them from expressing the strongly held opinions that it's court of choice for "patent whores."
I don't know the overturn rate, but a couple Supreme Court justices supposedly made some comments of concern a year or two ago. The fact I read that in another thread here should put some pause into it, but IIRC there was an article reference at the time that made me think it wasn't all wet.
The web site, if it is the one for the person suing, seems to make a completely different form of product. If they are behind the new billboard signs I see, well, that's quite a new product.
I don't think it actually relates to apple, but IANAL.
Even if the complaint is valid, shouldn't the lawsuit be against the suppliers of the infringing component? Is it Apple's responsibility to investigate every single component to ensure every single supplier isn't infringing on someone else's patent? What's next, am I going to be sued because I bought a TV that uses this technology?
Perhaps in this case, apple does design most of the parts down to the component level. With the new A4 processor you can bet anything patent related to cpu's will make apple liable now.
Comments
The state of Texas has no control over this court. It is a Federal Court. The judges are appointed by the President. One judge in particular, T. John Ward seems to be a favorite for patent lawsuits. Patent lawsuit in that federal district have increased over 10 times what they were before he became a judge there. And the plaintiffs in his patent cases seem to win at a higher rate than the defendants compared to other district courts. Losers in patent cases can appeal to the Federal District Court of Appeals, and then on to the Supreme Court.
----
Hopefully, Texans did not expect to get this type of publicity because of a Federal appointment. Interested in the President that gave birth to these filings.
Glad there are levels of appeal to get a just decision, assuming the appeal costs justify the extra expense. Each case costs the defendants, and eventually the consumers, world wide. "Loser pays all expenses" should help reduce troll type claims.
It usually is.
Okay, so everybody has to be good at something.
We are talking about a country where you can buy a gun (legally) one day and shoot 6 people the next (including some politician, Giffords right?). It goes without saying that legal system you have there is pretty f'ed.
IMO you are a jerk.
Someone can buy a bat, car, rat poison and / or a million other things and kill people with them.
THINGS don't kill people. PEOPLE kill people with things.
Someone can buy a bat, car, rat poison and / or a million other things and kill people with them.
THINGS don't kill people. PEOPLE kill people with things.
I have to agree with the last 2 sentences (I know not if you are an idiot).
Actually, for handguns, you have to wait a week. Also, a background check is done (little good that did in this case) but those can take several days. Not quite as much of a "run in, throw your cash down and you are out on your wild killing spree". Not much different you say - it does try to weed out those felons, registered crazies etc. However the gun law stops no one from buying from an acquaintance, criminal, etc. or someone else buying the gun for them (straw man purchase). This is the same problem everywhere, law or not. Those that want guns get them. Period.
More like AppleInsider needs to stop devoting a new thread everytime one of these gets filed- like who really cares?
Such a jaundiced view, iLiver.
Funny how in each and every one of these threads so many legal experts come out of the woodwork.
Sure, but still, I'll ask the same question I asked a few patent threads ago: if the the outcomes of patent cases before this particular judge's court are clearly out of line with the national norm (and apparently they are, else why the fondness for filing in this district?), how is that not evidence of judicial misconduct?
Not only am I not a lawyer, I have no earthly idea how this sort of thing is generally regarded, but I would have thought statistically significant variance from average outcomes would at least raise an eyebrow or two. Unless the theory is that you only go to Texas if you have a solid case to make, which doesn't really make much sense.
Sure, but still, I'll ask the same question I asked a few patent threads ago: if the the outcomes of patent cases before this particular judge's court are clearly out of line with the national norm (and apparently they are, else why the fondness for filing in this district?), how is that not evidence of judicial misconduct?
Not only am I not a lawyer, I have no earthly idea how this sort of thing is generally regarded, but I would have thought statistically significant variance from average outcomes would at least raise an eyebrow or two. Unless the theory is that you only go to Texas if you have a solid case to make, which doesn't really make much sense.
I asked some patent threads back if this court was overturned routinely on appeal. Not that anyone knows the answer, but it doesn't stop them from expressing the strongly held opinions that it's court of choice for "patent whores."
I asked some patent threads back if this court was overturned routinely on appeal. Not that anyone knows the answer, but it doesn't stop them from expressing the strongly held opinions that it's court of choice for "patent whores."
I don't know the overturn rate, but a couple Supreme Court justices supposedly made some comments of concern a year or two ago. The fact I read that in another thread here should put some pause into it, but IIRC there was an article reference at the time that made me think it wasn't all wet.
I don't think it actually relates to apple, but IANAL.
Even if the complaint is valid, shouldn't the lawsuit be against the suppliers of the infringing component? Is it Apple's responsibility to investigate every single component to ensure every single supplier isn't infringing on someone else's patent? What's next, am I going to be sued because I bought a TV that uses this technology?
Perhaps in this case, apple does design most of the parts down to the component level. With the new A4 processor you can bet anything patent related to cpu's will make apple liable now.