Desire2Learn v Blackboard - who wins?
Jury selection is expected to begin Monday morning in Texas with the possibility that the trial will start that day as well. I have no idea whether this will be long or short - but I betcha it will be action packed - at least for the VLE geeks out there, like me.
Here is my biggest fear. This case will be decided by people who have no idea what they are doing. There will be a jury of people who decide this case who are totally clueless about the entire world of virtual learning environments. How does that make sense? When people are on a jury for a murder trial, the people understand the concept of one person murdering another. They are not dealing with a concept that is completely foreign to them.
The jury members in this trial are going to hear arguments from Blackboard attorneys and from D2L attorneys. Does the fate of this case depend on which side provides a description of facts that are most easily understood by a layperson, even though a layperson cannot be expected to understand all the intricacies of software development, whether prior art applies, and whether the patent should have been granted in the first place?
In other words, will it just be a matter of who is more convincing to an audience (jury) that doesn't have any idea what they are talking about? That sounds a whole lot more like chance than justice. "But it's the best system we have ...." Bull.
Here is my biggest fear. This case will be decided by people who have no idea what they are doing. There will be a jury of people who decide this case who are totally clueless about the entire world of virtual learning environments. How does that make sense? When people are on a jury for a murder trial, the people understand the concept of one person murdering another. They are not dealing with a concept that is completely foreign to them.
The jury members in this trial are going to hear arguments from Blackboard attorneys and from D2L attorneys. Does the fate of this case depend on which side provides a description of facts that are most easily understood by a layperson, even though a layperson cannot be expected to understand all the intricacies of software development, whether prior art applies, and whether the patent should have been granted in the first place?
In other words, will it just be a matter of who is more convincing to an audience (jury) that doesn't have any idea what they are talking about? That sounds a whole lot more like chance than justice. "But it's the best system we have ...." Bull.
Comments