Re: IBM bathroom patent symbolic of US patent ills

["Jim Hewitt" <jim.hewitt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

"James Arthur" <dagmargoodboat@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:6b6af1d7-b377-4f9c-8334-b0e844e941ac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>> Absolutely!  I have to tell you the most bizarre story related to this.
>>
>> I was on a jury once.  Both the plaintiff and the defandent has their own
>> 'expert' witness about a particular medical fact.  The opinions where
>> diametrically opposed.  But it turns out that the two experts were
>> partners
>> in the same company.  We all had a good chuckle when that came out.
>>
>> So I agree with your Newton's law analogy but somehow it makes me sad.
>> In
>> law it appears that the truth depends on how much you are willing to
>> spend
>> for it.
>>
>> Jim
>
> It's a tough spot for a juror to be in--the court restricts the info
> you're allowed to consider, often to expert testimony.  And we've all
> seen a lot of wrong experts.
>
> Our adversarial system allows giving only the info that supports your
> position.  I call that lying.
>
> The other side is supposed to notice and provide counterpoint.  It's a
> good system, but the lawyers have turned it into a caricature.  It
> still works amazingly well.  Could be even better, methinks, if both
> sides aimed more for truthfulness.

Agreed!

> But, then again, I've never been selected as a juror...

Doubtful I will (allow myself to) be selected again for a jury, after my
first experience.

Unless it has to do with a patent.  (There, brought us back on topic!)

Jim