Design Con 2015
Breaking News
Comments
Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
Kevin Cousineau, P.E.
User Rank
Rookie
re: Foreman defends Apple vs. Samsung verdict in video
Kevin Cousineau, P.E.   9/5/2012 4:54:23 PM
NO RATINGS
As an engineer and a patent holder, I feel a huge black mark has come down on engineering because of this foreman's decision to "steer" the rest of the jury, basically making the jury decision a decision of 1 and not a decision of 9. It is incredulous to believe that all prior art presented was ignored in the decision of this single engineer. Apple copied the ideas of many before it, and as such it should not own the rights to the work of those others.

Robotics Developer
User Rank
Rookie
re: Foreman defends Apple vs. Samsung verdict in video
Robotics Developer   8/31/2012 2:41:51 PM
NO RATINGS
Frank, I agree that INTENT does matter! I do not have firsthand knowledge of any company that discourages engineers from doing patent searches but that might make sense. I would be more inclined to do the search to make sure that I am not getting into hot water prior to spending company time/money on a patent. Maybe I am the only one who thinks this way, but it makes sense to not "re-invent the wheel" as it can only lead to trouble (especially if the product it is used for goes into production and is a major success).

Inov
User Rank
Rookie
re: Foreman defends Apple vs. Samsung verdict in video
Inov   8/31/2012 2:22:28 PM
NO RATINGS
It is shame! As of today technologies moving up, most of the works yesterday were become industry standards. I owned more than 30 patents and have reviewed hundreds of patents, I found that most of the patents' ideas are similar for the non expert people. It is shame again for us!

Inov
User Rank
Rookie
re: Foreman defends Apple vs. Samsung verdict in video
Inov   8/31/2012 2:20:17 PM
NO RATINGS
I agree with you. It is shame! As of today technologies moving up, most of the works yesterday were become industry standards. I owned more than 30 patents and have reviewed hundreds of patents, I found that most of the patents' ideas are similar for the non expert people. It is shame again for us!

old account Frank Eory
User Rank
Rookie
re: Foreman defends Apple vs. Samsung verdict in video
old account Frank Eory   8/30/2012 10:19:24 PM
NO RATINGS
Actually intent DOES count in terms of whether the damages are tripled or not. There are probably companies that discourage their engineers from doing patent searches or studying patents for this very reason. If an engineer designs something not knowing that someone else has patents on one or more aspects of that design, then by virtue of ignorance-is-bliss, it wasn't willful infringement. If on the other hand he or she is aware of the prior art, then it might be decided that the prior art was intentionally and willfully used without license and the damages could be tripled. The rationale for this is of course to discourage infringement. If the damages were limited to 1x the royalty that should've been paid, there is little disincentive against infringing. If you get away with it, you pay nothing. If you get caught, you end up paying what you would've had to pay anyway. But if you have to pay 3x what you would otherwise have had to pay, you might think twice before intentionally infringing on someone else's patent.

Greg.Dee
User Rank
Rookie
re: Foreman defends Apple vs. Samsung verdict in video
Greg.Dee   8/30/2012 6:59:36 AM
NO RATINGS
Tough questions there Merritt..not, pro apple stance again eh buddy, could u at least stop showing the Samsung phone with the app drawer open AND scaled in the photo so it looks the same. No mention of the prior art that was disallowed and the jury not following instructions etc. Or that it looks like American Protectionism... Sue instead of compete..etc. etc.. I guess there's a reason tech comes to the states dead last.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1s_PybOuY0&feature=player_embedded

Neo10
User Rank
Rookie
re: Foreman defends Apple vs. Samsung verdict in video
Neo10   8/30/2012 5:40:28 AM
NO RATINGS
It's not like his judgement decided the fate of a persons life, once it is determined the patent was valid however silly it could have been, they had to simply decide if Samsung designs had those or not. Intent does not count here.

rwik78
User Rank
Rookie
re: Foreman defends Apple vs. Samsung verdict in video
rwik78   8/30/2012 5:11:50 AM
NO RATINGS
This guy gave a verdict on the patent system, because he won two. And influenced the rest of the jury. Not on Apple or Samsung innovations. Being an engineer myself, I woudnt call any jury duty the highlight of my career. What a shame....

Stanley_
User Rank
Rookie
re: Foreman defends Apple vs. Samsung verdict in video
Stanley_   8/30/2012 4:37:42 AM
NO RATINGS
next step for Mr. Hogan should be writing a book on his jury experience, and making sure apple know the price of the book. My suggestion for the title of the book..."The Darkroom"...



Flash Poll
Top Comments of the Week
Like Us on Facebook
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
EE Life
Frankenstein's Fix, Teardowns, Sideshows, Design Contests, Reader Content & More
Max Maxfield

Want to Present a Paper at ESC Boston 2015?
Max Maxfield
8 comments
I tell you, I need more hours in each day. If I was having any more fun, there would have to be two of me to handle it all. For example, I just heard that I'm going to be both a speaker ...

Martin Rowe

No 2014 Punkin Chunkin, What Will You Do?
Martin Rowe
Post a comment
American Thanksgiving is next week, and while some people watch (American) football all day, the real competition on TV has become Punkin Chunkin. But there will be no Punkin Chunkin on TV ...

Rich Quinnell

Making the Grade in Industrial Design
Rich Quinnell
12 comments
As every developer knows, there are the paper specifications for a product design, and then there are the real requirements. The paper specs are dry, bland, and rigidly numeric, making ...

Martin Rowe

Book Review: Controlling Radiated Emissions by Design
Martin Rowe
1 Comment
Controlling Radiated Emissions by Design, Third Edition, by Michel Mardiguian. Contributions by Donald L. Sweeney and Roger Swanberg. List price: $89.99 (e-book), $119 (hardcover).