Expert Witness

The U.S. District Court of Delaware's "Default Standard for Access to Source Code" follows many but not all recommended best practices for source code discovery.  This month we consider potential areas for improvement in the default rules of this important venue for patent infringement and software copyright litigation.

The long-running court fight between Google and Oracle over Android's unlicensed use of Java API code is coming to a final battle at the Supreme Court. The importance of the final decision in this case to software developers cannot be understated.  

In the context of a civil or criminal court case, a witness is a person who answers questions under oath during a deposition or a trial.  The statements of each witness are his testimony, which is one type of evidence that the trier of fact (judge or jury) may consider in reaching its ultimate decision about what happened.  Significantly, there are several types of witnesses—including expert witnesses—with the rules regarding testimony depending on the type.  In particular, this article explains why opinions are allowed to be included in expert witness testimony.

Laws and legal systems vary by country, sometimes substantially.  Being geographical and cultural neighbors that also share a basis in British common law, it might seem that courts in the United States and Canada would be among the most similar in the world.  In fact, however, there are many significant distinctions.  In this article we summarize some noteworthy differences.

It is often a challenge for non-lawyers—including expert witnesses new to patent litigation—to distinguish between the phrases "patent infringement" and "patent invalidity."  Adding to the potential for confusion, these two very different legal concerns are often at issue in a single trial and thus to be considered and decided by the very same judge or jury.  This article clarifies the distinction between infringement and invalidity.

A brief glossary of licensing terminology to help engineering teams understand legal terms related to open source software.

The rising popularity of Linux has spurred many embedded developers to consider it as an RTOS alternative. Here are just some of the legal implications for the proprietary parts of firmware with which developers should be familiar.

In this technology brief, we present key findings from Barr Group's 2018 Embedded Systems Safety and Security Survey that is relevant to lawyers engaging in litigation over the design of electronics and software.

Software has become ubiquitous. From microwave ovens to electronic throttle controls, it is now embedded into the fabric of our lives through billions of new products each year.  Whether for infringement of intellectual property rights or product liability, when products controlled by software are the subject of litigation, it is imperative to analyze the embedded software, also known as firmware, properly and thoroughly.

During the Gulf War, twenty-eight U.S. soldiers were killed and almost one hundred others were wounded when a nearby Patriot missile defense system failed to properly track a Scud missile launched from Iraq. The cause of the failure was later found to be a programming error in the computer embedded in the Patriot’s weapons control system.