Judge Overturns $625.5M Patent Suit Against Apple

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Remember last fall when a federal jury awarded a man $625.5M because Apple infringed on his patents? Well, a judge today decided to overturn the award saying something about the jury being gullible. Hopefully the guy can appeal.

In October, a federal jury in Tyler determined that Apple infringed on three of Mirror Worlds' patents, which cover several features on Apple's Mac computers, iPhones and iPods. The technologies at issue include Cover Flow, which lets users flip through album covers and other content as if through a stack of cards; Time Machine, which performs automatic backups; and Spotlight, which is software for searching computer hard drives.
Click to expand...
 
Love how a trial by jury can be so easily dismissed by a single person. Why even have a trial in the first place?
 
Ultima99 said:
Amazing.
Click to expand...

yes this is appealable and always is appealabe, and the standard to overturn jury verdicts is very very high. more likely than not the judge will be over ruled. what is more likely is the amount might be reduced, but very rarely is the actual verdict overturned in case where there were no procedurals errors.
 
The technologies at issue include Cover Flow, which lets users flip through album covers and other content as if through a stack of cards; Time Machine, which performs automatic backups; and Spotlight, which is software for searching computer hard drives.
Click to expand...

Seems pretty unlikely that the guy owned relevant and valid patents in three widely differing areas of the app like that...
 
lol, jury was "gullible". the same can be said for the idiots handing out "patents" to prior art non-inventions
 
The reasoning isn't that the jury was gullible, it's more complicated than that (it involves issues of law that are complex and boring, and, therefore, no journalist would actually get into it)
 
SilverSliver said:
Love how a trial by jury can be so easily dismissed by a single person. Why even have a trial in the first place?
Click to expand...

Because there are times when there is no way that a jury, if they properly understood the law, could come to the conclusion that they end up coming to. In that case, it is necessary for the judge to step in.

Judge Davis is an extremely experienced judge when it comes to patent trials, hearing 50-100+ per year (compared to most federal judges hearing maybe 1-2?), and has an excellent appellate record (i.e. few reversals). This is NOT going to be some whimsical decision by a judge who is ignorant to the complexities of patent law.
 
SilverSliver said:
Love how a trial by jury can be so easily dismissed by a single person. Why even have a trial in the first place?
Click to expand...

Yeah, so much for that reason their being trials so that one person (a judge) wouldn't be able to condemn a man on a whim of his own.

I'm sorry, if Apple was too fucking stupid to screen out jurors they didn't like they fucking lose, this isn't a case where some court appointed attorney's incompetence screwed Apple over.
 
why in the name of all hell is a judge in tyler, texas making this kind of call?

Tyler grows roses pretty well, they don't do a damned thing else, and a judge in Tyler has zero business over this case.

I can't even believe it's tyler, tx. I read that thinking, "oh wow there is a big city named Tyler that isn't in texas and isn't known for growing roses!." Then I saw it was Tyler, Texas, and face-palmed.
 
and ya I get that the first ruling was in tyler, but seriously, the roses and earl campbell are all that ever came out of that city. They are over their heads.
 
SilverSliver said:
Love how a trial by jury can be so easily dismissed by a single person. Why even have a trial in the first place?
Click to expand...

Why? There are entire referendums and voting initiatives that have the same thing done to them too. Oh, don't like the results of an election, well, then have an army of lawyers that have already drawn up filling papers for court weeks before an election, wait for the results, if they aren't in your favor, march down to the courthouse the next day and file, get an injunction, and watch over time as the voice of the electorate gets a steaming pile of shit shoved in their mouths from a magistrate bench warmer.

This judgment is no different and the judge in calling the jury gullible in effect just shit on the jury system by saying that the entire process of vetting the jurors on both sides of the case is utterly meaningless and pointless because he can overturn what they say anyway because he thinks they are stupid. If I was a juror and I had the awesome task of deciding a case like this only to be called a moron by a judge on appeal, I'd be pretty pissed off about it.
 
stealthy123 said:
why in the name of all hell is a judge in tyler, texas making this kind of call?

Tyler grows roses pretty well, they don't do a damned thing else, and a judge in Tyler has zero business over this case.

I can't even believe it's tyler, tx. I read that thinking, "oh wow there is a big city named Tyler that isn't in texas and isn't known for growing roses!." Then I saw it was Tyler, Texas, and face-palmed.
Click to expand...

Tons of patent cases happen in Tyler because it's a favorable jurisdiction.
 
The judge is not for humans as his sponsors are deep pocket corps. Of course Apple will skate and there will be no settlement while the individual still lives.
 
i mean really...

Time Machine, which performs automatic backups; and Spotlight, which is software for searching computer hard drives.
Click to expand...

this is pretty dam general, this guy must be going after every software maker around then since there are many companies that do this.
 
William Gibson's vision of the corporately owned state (which was really just a twist on Orwell's) is totally becoming true.

If a jury verdict can be so easilly overturned, theres no point in jury trials whatsoever.

we are totally fucked.
 
christianw said:
William Gibson's vision of the corporately owned state (which was really just a twist on Orwell's) is totally becoming true.

If a jury verdict can be so easilly overturned, theres no point in jury trials whatsoever.

we are totally fucked.
Click to expand...

In light of this story, it kind of puts a spotlight on the judges who aren't overturning the ridiculous damages that "gullible" juries have awarded the RIAA.
 
Here's the thing about Mirror Worlds, they didn't invent a damn thing. I don't understand how someone sitting around his desk can come up with an idea, put it down on paper file it with USPTO and get a patent granted, all without building the thing in the first place.At least with Apple they actually had working products. Mirror World? Nope don't think so.
 
Wow, I can't believe the guys face when he won that lawsuit in the first place.

And I bet he just might be in jail/mental hospital right now after finding out about that judge and his decision to overturn his money. Hahahaha, at least I know I won't ever be the biggest sucker in the world!
 
Ok, what the hell...

If it was anyone but Apple, it would be "Woohoo, finally a ridiculous patent suit gets overturned"
 
It looks like some of you didn't read the article?

Article said:
The technologies at issue include Cover Flow, which lets users flip through album covers and other content as if through a stack of cards; Time Machine, which performs automatic backups; and Spotlight, which is software for searching computer hard drives.
Click to expand...

This guy looks like a patent troll to me. I'm not Apple's biggest fan, but c'mon. I think what the judge did was right. As others have said, when the jury fails where the law is concerned, judges can step in and make it right. Juries aren't infallible.
 
ryken said:
The reasoning isn't that the jury was gullible
Click to expand...
Yes, it essentially is. The judge found that the jury ruled Apple infringed even though it had not been given any evidence in a couple of the claims.

Oh Tyler, TX juries, will the patent award shenanigans ever end? :p There's a reason patent owners (trolls or not) choose that venue. The judge's findings in the link below are very alarming.

http://articles.law360.s3.amazonaws...de_seq_num-1417-dm_id-6993944-doc_num-478.pdf

Apple is not off the hook yet and may still face another similar judgement.
 
rhouck said:
Because there are times when there is no way that a jury, if they properly understood the law, could come to the conclusion that they end up coming to. In that case, it is necessary for the judge to step in.

Judge Davis is an extremely experienced judge when it comes to patent trials, hearing 50-100+ per year (compared to most federal judges hearing maybe 1-2?), and has an excellent appellate record (i.e. few reversals). This is NOT going to be some whimsical decision by a judge who is ignorant to the complexities of patent law.
Click to expand...
The first trial also had a judge, who presumably had the same powers but had an actual jury beside him who he could advise as to the relevant statutes.

As pxc points out, the problem lies with that first judge.
 
Your team of lawyers earned their pay and convinced the jury, then another judge sees what happened, declares jury incompetent and overturns it anyway.
 
If I read things right with the original trial, didn't Apple basically admit patent infringing on 1 of the 3 patents but it looked like Mirror Worlds got greedy and wanted it all. If nothing else then they should still get them for the 1 patent right? Just asking cause I'm confused with all this legal shit.
 
pxc said:
Yes, it essentially is. The judge found that the jury ruled Apple infringed even though it had not been given any evidence in a couple of the claims.

Oh Tyler, TX juries, will the patent award shenanigans ever end? :p There's a reason patent owners (trolls or not) choose that venue. The judge's findings in the link below are very alarming.

http://articles.law360.s3.amazonaws...de_seq_num-1417-dm_id-6993944-doc_num-478.pdf

Apple is not off the hook yet and may still face another similar judgement.
Click to expand...

Don't worry as they say in the real world "Money talks and bullshit walks" well Apple has very deep pockets and its also a well known fact Judges goes for the highest bidders. Apple will just pay it's way out of this one way or the other.
 
soulman901 said:
Here's the thing about Mirror Worlds, they didn't invent a damn thing. I don't understand how someone sitting around his desk can come up with an idea, put it down on paper file it with USPTO and get a patent granted, all without building the thing in the first place.At least with Apple they actually had working products. Mirror World? Nope don't think so.
Click to expand...

Well I'd feel bad if Apple didn't do the exact same thing in other cases, sure sometimes it's for things they've built but more then a few were for things that never were used on working product.

Also remember Apple is the father of the "look and feel" suit for patent infringement.
 
sfsuphysics said:
Yeah, so much for that reason their being trials so that one person (a judge) wouldn't be able to condemn a man on a whim of his own.

I'm sorry, if Apple was too fucking stupid to screen out jurors they didn't like they fucking lose, this isn't a case where some court appointed attorney's incompetence screwed Apple over.
Click to expand...

This is the exact OPPOSITE of "condemning a man on a whim". It would be the equivalent of OVERTURNING a guilty verdict for a clearly innocent man.

And you appear to have an incomplete knowledge of how voire dire works. The jury screening process in civil trials doesn't mean you can just get rid of anyone and everyone you don't like... parties get to pick very few individuals (the EXTREME outliers) to exclude. Calling Apple "fucking stupid" for how they screened jurors just shows your own ignorance.

Methadras said:
This judgment is no different and the judge in calling the jury gullible in effect just shit on the jury system by saying that the entire process of vetting the jurors on both sides of the case is utterly meaningless and pointless because he can overturn what they say anyway because he thinks they are stupid. If I was a juror and I had the awesome task of deciding a case like this only to be called a moron by a judge on appeal, I'd be pretty pissed off about it.
Click to expand...

He should be shitting on the jury system for patent trials. You are trying highly technical patents in front of a group of people who MANY of which have never even graduated from HIGH SCHOOL. There are many good reasons why other countries do not submit patent cases to a jury... Thus it is very very important to have a qualified judge who is experienced with patent law in order to try and keep the jury on track.

Even then, that doesn't always happen or isn't possible. That is why JMOL (Judgment as a Matter Of Law) exists. This is a high standard and the judge gives the nonmoving party every benefit of the doubt, and the verdict is only overturned where there is NO legal basis for the verdict (i.e. the jury COMPLETELY fucked up). This is NOT for where a judge merely disagrees with jury.

srangara said:
The first trial also had a judge, who presumably had the same powers but had an actual jury beside him who he could advise as to the relevant statutes.

As pxc points out, the problem lies with that first judge.
Click to expand...

Judge Davis was the first judge. This occurs after the verdict from the trial is given but before the case is heard by the Federal Circuit. "You can't lead a horse to water..." Sometimes a judge does all they can do and a jury still screws the pooch.
 
Seriously guys, this was in east Texas, land of the patent trolls.

Any time you see a story about a patent lawsuit that includes the word "Tyler" or "east Texas", you should turn your skepticism dial to 11.
 
I wonder how much Steve Jobs paid off that judge. Or maybe he sucked the judge dry, which explains why Jobs is sick. :rolleyes:
 
Judges throw cases out all the time, at all stages of litigation. You guys don't actually think every claim should be decided by a jury, do you? The only reason the judge waited until the jury reached a verdict, is so if he himself is overturned, a whole new trail won't then be necessary.
 
i would have expected this in California, but not Texas. gullible jury or buy-able judge. the former is easier to tolerate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top