Judge Overrules Samsung Objection To Jury Instructional Video 232
itwbennett (1594911) writes "U.S. District Judge Lucy H. Koh on Sunday overruled Samsung Electronics' objections to showing jurors a recent instructional video on how patents work, ahead of a trial in a patent dispute between Apple and Samsung. The new video, called 'The Patent Process: An Overview for Jurors,' was developed by the Federal Judicial Center to provide jurors with an introduction to the patent system. Samsung's objection is to several scenes in which Apple products are depicted and used (and, by extension, seen as patentable and innovative)."
Re:Bad law... (Score:4, Informative)
There's a quick video montage of inventions starting at the 2:55 mark which features an old polycarbonate MacBook (or a late-model iBook?), an iPad, and an iPhone, but the logos are not visible on any of them. To be perfectly honest, despite having owned an iPad and that model of iPhone, I didn't even recognize them as being Apple products until I re-watched the video, just because of the angles they were shot at and the actions the scenes were focusing on. Had I not been looking for them, I wouldn't have seen them.
The only Apple product that is on-screen for any length of time, as well as being the only one with the logo clearly visible, is what appears to be a MacBook Pro being used by the actor portraying an inventor, but in no way was it suggested that the computer itself was the invention. Rather, the invention was some CAD diagram he had on his computer. Even so, the computer does get quite a bit of screen time with the shining Apple logo clearly visible.
Re:Bad law... (Score:2, Informative)
These are shown for about 5 seconds of a 20 minute instructional video, and none of them even show an Apple logo. Later in the video it shows people using an Apple laptop to do work, not as an example of a patented technology.
This is such a tea pot tempest. It'd be silly to not use this video.
Re:Blatant conflict of interest (Score:3, Informative)
That's not insightful at all, unless the factories started employing 2-year old babies.
Re:Bad law... (Score:5, Informative)
Maybe you should watch it again. Forward the video to 2:54, where it narrates the following quotation:
During the lifetime of the patent, its disclosure may inspire other inventions.
As the quote is read, it shows an Appe II, then a Macbook. Immediately afterwards, it shows an iPad and an iPhone.
Re:Bad law... (Score:4, Informative)
If this video were the ONLY possible means of educating the jurors about the patent system, you might have a constructive point. It's nevertheless "leading" or whatever to portray any Apple product in a positive light with respect to patents
They're not. They show BOTH PCs and Macbooks in the video being used to perform activities related to patents, such as the inventor using the computer to work on the invention / prepare the application, and examiners to review the application.
The video doesn't show a smartphone being used. The only smartphone device I could see appears to be in the background on the table with the laptop the coffee, etc --- it's not being used as an 'example' of a patentable invention.
It is definitely the sort of thing you would see every day.
Re:Which is why Apple does product placement (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Which is why Apple does product placement (Score:5, Informative)
The tv comedy 30rock always had apple products. You see their name in the credits, promotional consideration provided by Apple. See imdb for a listing of show credits
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt12... [imdb.com]
You're welcome!