[p2p-hackers] Altnet goes after p2p networks with obvious patent

[Susheel Daswani]

Well definitely defer to his advice - I'm only 1/6th a lawyer, and
maybe not even that much if you have to count bar passage :).  But at
least I don't charge ;).

That makes sense though - juries are factfinders, so if all the facts
regarding patent validity were uncontested by both parties, the ruling
would be a matter of law for a judge.

I've been looking at the case Akamai Techs. v. Cable & Wireless
Internet Servs., 344 F.3d 1186.  The patents mentioned in this case
are Patent No. 6,108,703 and Patent No. 6,185,598.  Neither of those
match the patent that Altnet is alleging infringed, right?  I'm not
sure if the patent numbering system is funky or whatever.  Also, there
was definitely a jury decision at the trial court level, but I'm not
sure regarding what.  I'm going to read this case fully soon and then
I'll report back.  I am just afraid it isn't relevant.

Sush

On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 11:48:17 +0000, Ian Clarke <ian at locut.us> wrote:
> Since then I spoke to a lawyer, and he pointed out that jurys rule on
> matters of fact, not matters of law, and the validity of this patent
> would be a matter of law - making it very unlikely that their claim is
> accurate.
> 
> Ian.
> 
> On 16 Jan 2005, at 02:21, Susheel Daswani wrote:
> 
> > "Clearly I am not a lawyer (and everything I know about IP law I wish I
> > didn't need to know), but I am not sure why a jury, having decided that
> > Akamai doesn't use the patented technology, would bother to comment on
> > whether the patent was valid.  Was the validity of the patent even
> > contested?"
> >
> > I'm researching the case, but the jury may have made a special
> > verdict, whereby they are posed several questions and they rule on
> > each in turn (Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 49(a)).  So it is very
> > possible that they could find the patent valid but Akamai
> > non-infringing.
> >
> > More to follow.  That brief you sent seemed to be in regards to the
> > trial court case which was superseded by an appellate case (I think).
> > Susheel
> > _______________________________________________
> > p2p-hackers mailing list
> > p2p-hackers at zgp.org
> > http://zgp.org/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers
> > _______________________________________________
> > Here is a web page listing P2P Conferences:
> > http://www.neurogrid.net/twiki/bin/view/Main/PeerToPeerConferences
> >
> >
> --
> Founder, The Freenet Project    http://freenetproject.org/
> CEO, Cematics Ltd                               http://cematics.com/
> Personal Blog                                   http://locut.us/~ian/blog/
> 
>