Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
The Courts Patents Apple

Judge Posner To Apple & Motorola: Go Home 63

reebmmm writes "Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Richard Posner, voluntarily sitting as a district court judge, in the patent infringement dispute between Apple and Motorola has, tentatively, dismissed the case on the eve of trial. In this hilariously short order, Judge Posner states, 'I have tentatively decided that the case should be dismissed with prejudice because neither party can establish a right to relief.' Because it is 'with prejudice' the parties cannot refile their case. The parties are likely to appeal the order (when it's finalized)."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Judge Posner To Apple & Motorola: Go Home

Comments Filter:
  • by hi-endian ( 2589843 ) on Friday June 08, 2012 @07:13PM (#40263963) Homepage
    Never seen it before. I guess this case is important! lol
    • by Anonymous Coward

      You shouldn't. That means you're seeing it before it has gone live. Which is generally a plum that only subscribers enjoy.

      • by Gr8Apes ( 679165 )
        Actually, non-subscribers can see a story about a minute before it goes live - they can't post, but they can read it. I've seen it multiple times.
      • by Hatta ( 162192 )

        That shows the quality of coding that goes into /..

        • My buest guess is that Slashdot, being a large site, has several geographically distributed caching servers (which are btw running Varnish)
          It takes some time to populate and propagate the content to all proxies. Add possible time desynchronization and there comes your too-early/too-late.

          We are talking tech news, not some high-precision announcement so the amount of cpu-power, engineering and system maintenance required to reduce the delay to e.g. a few seconds is simply unacceptable
      • I think, also, those with very high Karma can sometimes get a story early for free. I've posted on red-header stories, before, and I'm not a subscriber.

  • Huh (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 08, 2012 @07:22PM (#40264041)

    Sounds like ol'timey judgin'.

    Y'all idjits go home now, and stop actin' like children in my here courtroom.

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Friday June 08, 2012 @07:23PM (#40264049)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • hell yea. i hope there appeal gets denied as well. and they better count there blessings and just go home if it did go to trial he would have just tossed both there patents and tossed the case anyways.
  • Common sense (Score:5, Insightful)

    by hhawk ( 26580 ) on Friday June 08, 2012 @07:28PM (#40264087) Homepage Journal

    This seems like common sense and the first good news in a while about our seemingly broken patent system.

    It seems to me that if it can be done on a computer any computer, than it's not automatically "novel" if you can do it on a slightly different type of computer (desktop, laptop, mobile device, in car navigation system, etc.) Stop "pretending" to invent something new for Mobile devices when the same technology already exists for desktops, Etc.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by SQLGuru ( 980662 )

      Exactly. Software patents based on platform are stupid. The logic didn't change.....just the libraries called (and sometimes, not even those -- Windows Phone uses many of the same .Net calls as regular Windows).

    • Re:Common sense (Score:5, Informative)

      by DragonWriter ( 970822 ) on Friday June 08, 2012 @07:58PM (#40264395)

      This seems like common sense and the first good news in a while about our seemingly broken patent system.

      It seems to me that if it can be done on a computer any computer, than it's not automatically "novel" if you can do it on a slightly different type of computer

      The (tentative) ruling has nothing to do with definitions of patentable subject matter, novelty for patent purposes, or validity of the patents for any other reason; it is all about the inability of either side to demonstrate damages tied to the alleged violation of the presumed-valid patents, and the lack of any basis for any relief aside from an award of damages. From the ruling:

      "Apple concedes that [...] it cannot prove damages for the alleged infringement of the '002 and '949 patents. [...] I tentatively conclude that its admissible evidence of damages with respect to [its claims for infringement of the '263 and '647 patents] does not [...] withstand Motorola's motion for summary judgement. I likewise conclude that the admissible evidence of damages with respect to the alleged infringement of Motorola's '898 patent also fails to create a genuine issue of material fact. That leaves only the parties' claims to injunctive relief. [...] I cannot find a basis for an award of injunctive relief."

      • Wouldn't it be nice if the music and movie industries had to prove they lost money because your ip address was on a bittorrent server?
    • the entire patent war is bs on mostly bs patents. look when Microsoft tried to sue b$n and they called there bluff and the patents got to the public how much of a joke they where. so much so they dropped it and just bought a bunch of shares with barns so they didn't get there asses kicked in court.
  • A Fine example... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by stox ( 131684 ) on Friday June 08, 2012 @07:28PM (#40264097) Homepage

    of the job a judge is supposed to do.

  • "...I may change my mind..."

    I don't hear no fat lady yet

  • by Anonymous Coward

    ... Judge Posner should run back over to his appeals court and tell them to go home again. :P

  • Love Posner (Score:5, Interesting)

    by brunes69 ( 86786 ) <slashdot.keirstead@org> on Friday June 08, 2012 @07:44PM (#40264275) Homepage

    Posner is my new favorite judge. He also supports legalization of marijuana and LSD.

    Read the ruling, it is only 1.5 pages, it is worth it :)

  • by PopeRatzo ( 965947 ) on Friday June 08, 2012 @07:58PM (#40264393) Journal

    22 years ago last December, Judge Posner presided over my marriage.

    I knew him a little bit and my wife and I got our marriage license. Posner was walking across Dearborn toward the Daley Center and I introduced him to my bride. We told him we were leaving on a honeymoon the next morning and he invited us to his chambers, which were in the Chancery section of the Circuit Court at the time, if I remember correctly and he performed the ceremony with a law clerk as witness.

    We later had a more ceremonial ceremony.

    Posner is a pretty good egg. The fact that he was an appointee of Ronald Reagan shows just how far our political frame has come from those days. Not one of the last two Republican presidents would have touched nominating Posner because the Republicans in congress would have shit themselves, not to mention the current Republican (free) base.

    • The Republicans are headed right back there, herded by the Tea Party.

      But the Republicans were never so far away from that standard as you think, you've just bought into the propaganda.

  • A short order (Score:4, Insightful)

    by PPH ( 736903 ) on Friday June 08, 2012 @09:58PM (#40265197)

    And yet, we get a link to Why? Did someone think we'd miss all the overhead of oddball formatting, disks spinning, Facebook popups and network LEDs flashing?

  • Wow, Both parties got got the judicial version of Screw you guys I am going home. Why should the court waste its time when you will apeal it later.
    Trully a great moment for the US Judicial System.

    Almost as good as when the Death Star (AT&T) was destroyed by Judge Greene in 1981.

  • by WOOFYGOOFY ( 1334993 ) on Saturday June 09, 2012 @09:26AM (#40267855)

    This guy is the most accomplished, most intelligent judge who will never ever be considered by anyone for an appointment to SCOTUS. He's way too frank, way too likely to follow his own excellent interpretation of the pro-social intentions behind laws and is routinely completely inappropriate, at least as adjudicated by either and both sides of the current US political bifurcation.

    Although some observers count him as a conservative, ( I guess because he's not expressly liberal?) the kind of independence, fearlessness and good common sense he delivers on a regular basis, often in pithy, high IQ, quotable-quote form, makes him ineligible to be considered one of the current crop of psycho, Ayn Rand worshiping, anti-science anti-evolution religious zealots that is the means test for "conservatives" these days.

    If we could populate our court system with judges like this guy (Republicans would filibuster) , our nation's judiciary would work more like it's supposed to and less like a force multiplier for corporations and special interests.

    If you're into the law either where it intersects with tech or broader society, this is a guy's name is worthy of a weekly Google alert.

    Some very Posnerian Posner quotes:

    âoeModern judicial opinions tend to be too long, and we shall try to be brief. We shall even forgo the usual prefatory statement of facts, which would disclose an utterly routine, though very large, illegal drug operation.â

    U.S. v. Herrera-Medina (1988).

    âoeThe filing of an appeal should never be a conditioned reflex. About half the practice of a decent lawyer consists in telling would-be clients that they are damned fools and should stop.â Hill v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co. (1987)

    And here's one that's sure to raise his esteem around these parts: .

    âoeGilding the lily, the officer testified that he was additionally suspicious because when he drove by [the suspect] in his squad car before turning around and getting out and accosting him he noticed that [the suspect] was âstar[ing] straight ahead.â(TM) Had [the suspect] instead glanced around him, the officer would doubtless have testified that [he] seemed nervous or, the preferred term because of the vagueness, âfurtive.â(TM) Whether you stand still or move, drive above, below or at the speed limit, you will be described by the police as acting suspiciously should they wish to stop or arrest you. Such subjective, promiscuous appeals to an ineffable intuition should not be credited.â U.S. v. Broomfield (2005)

    And finally:

    âoeOnce a case gets to the jury, all bets are off.â Speakers of Sport Inc. v. ProServ Inc. (1999)

Q: How many IBM CPU's does it take to execute a job? A: Four; three to hold it down, and one to rip its head off.