The jury were not judging the validity of the patents
The author is incorrect/ The jury was judging whether or not patents had been infringed.
This is like a court deciding on whether or not a driver has exceeded a speed limit. Whether the speed limit is right or wrong was not the remit of the court - the validity of the patents will be tested elsewhere.
I am all for intellectual copyright on truly innovative and original works with no "prior art". But when a company is granted a patent for a "bounce", a "sliding lock" or a rectangular shape (with or without curved corners) something IS serioulsy wrong.
Innovative drugs, the transistor junction, light emitting diodes, the Laser, Compact discs etc. ARE the sorts of things that patents ARE designed to protect, not things like a "bounce" that sea waves, ripples on a pool and railway buffers have been doing for years. "Slide to unlock" - my outside tollet had that before Steve Jobs was even born.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
