IP Innovation v. Red Hat/Novell - The Prior Art They Used at Trial
May 14, 2010, 12:32 (0 Talkback[s])
(Other stories by Pamela Jones)
WEBINAR: On-demand Event
Replace Oracle with the NoSQL Engagement Database: Why and how leading companies are making the switch REGISTER >
"I know the first thing you wanted to know after you heard that
Red Hat and Novell had prevailed and the jury had found that IP
Innovation's patents were worthless was this: did we at Groklaw
help when we did prior art searching?
"The answer is, Yes. It turns out that you did. I have the
transcripts from the trial, and I've been reading them for days
now, because even though I can't share the transcripts with you
yet, until the court says it's OK, I know you are dying of
curiosity, so I'm reading them to let you know what happened. So,
let me tell you what I have learned, part one.
"First, I know you want to know what prior art was used first
thing, and here is the answer, from the judge's instructions to the
jury just before closing arguments: the Chan Room system, the
Macintosh Switcher, and the Amiga workbench. There is a story about
the Amiga in particular, and that's where you come in.
"First, a call went out on Groklaw for prior art. When news of
this litigation first broke in 2007, and I asked if any of you knew
of any prior art, one of the first comments mentioned the Amiga. I
kid you not. Another almost immediately mentioned still owning an
Amiga or two. In 2009, Red Hat officially asked the world for prior
art, and again someone here mentioned the Amiga. So you guys knew
before the lawyers did, which of course you would. It's your area
of expertise. That's what I get from it. And that I should have
made sure they were reading Groklaw in 2007. Next time."