Juror Incompetence September 6, 2005
Posted by atharkhan in : Humor , trackbackIn his 1994 book “The Jury” (ISBN: 0385479697), Stephen J. Adler tells of an antitrust case involving the computer industry that stalled after three weeks of jury deliberations. Although purely anecdotal, the following transpired between the judge and the jury which involved, what was at the time, complex technology after the jury returned its verdict:
The Court: Do you know what demand substitutability is, [Juror A]?
Juror A: Well, I would like to kind of look into that.
The Court: Okay. And how about the barriers to entry, [Juror B]?
Juror B: I would have to read about it. . . .
The Court: All right. And how about reverse engineering, [Juror C]?
Juror C: That’s when you would take a product and you would alter it in a, or modify it for your own purpose; that is, you would reverse its function and use it in your own method.
The Court: And [Juror D], what is software?
Juror D: It’s software.
The Court: Well, what is software?
Juror D: That’s the paper software.
The Court: What’s the hardware?
Juror D: That’s the wires and hardware.
The Court: And what is — do you know what an interface is? [1]
Juror D: Yes.
The Court: Can you given me an example of that?
Juror D: Well, if you take a blivet, turn it off one thing and drop it down, its an interface change, right? [1]
[1]. An interface is the connection between a computer and an auxiliary piece of equipment. This concept was discussed at length during this trial.
Note: You can read the full article at Professor Kimberly A. Moore’s website. The blog post above also contains an excerpt from Laura Mansnerus’ article in the NY Times.
Comments»
no comments yet - be the first?