Just when you though Apple Vs. Samsung was over.

[DanteMann]

It seems like the internet is a blaze with opinions on the verdict. You get the overwhelming vibe that most thought the jury was incompetent while the verdict was rushed and a complete farce. I won't be surprised if the Judge actually throws out the verdict at Samsung's request, or if Samsung wins on Appeal. Now I see why Judge Posner, such a highly respected judge, feels trials like these should never be had with a jury like this. I would love to hear what he thinks of this gong show.

 

[ixodes]

Those of us who've been following it closely, know it's far from over.

Not only that, Apple is deeply immersed in many such cases that have only received limited press due to the size of the current skirmish.

Sadly, Apple will burn up years of preoccupation with legal assaults on their competitors. Having launched the first one, thereby setting the precedence, they've signaled their intentions to all.

Instead of competing in the open market, Apple's now taken it into the courts. Creating a much more complex way to operate. Flush with endless cash, pit bull like lawyers, Apple's well equipped to do battle in just the way Steve wanted.

It's a new era, one that will keep Hollywood busy with material for movies. A win win for Apple and their chosen few.

 

[nuckinfutz]

I'm not sure where the incompetence of the jury has crept in. The basic tenet of our judicial system is Trial by Jury.

Just because you don't agree with the outcome doesn't make the Jury incompetent.

12 adults made a decision based on the facts and testimony given and they agreed that Samsung was at fault.

You're not going to see a judge overturn a Jury decision unless there is proof of juror tampering or impropriety.

Appeals will happen...count on it but Samsung knowns it's swimming upstream.

 

[DanteMann]

I'm not sure where the incompetence of the jury has crept in. The basic tenet of our judicial system is Trial by Jury.

Just because you don't agree with the outcome doesn't make the Jury incompetent.

12 adults made a decision based on the facts and testimony given and they agreed that Samsung was at fault.

You're not going to see a judge overturn a Jury decision unless there is proof of juror tampering or impropriety.

Appeals will happen...count on it but Samsung knowns it's swimming upstream.

Oh really, is your bias for Apple so thick you think this verdict wasn't at the least rushed? 3 days? Really, 3 days for such a complex case. 3 days for 700 questions? The very fact they had inconsistencies in the dollar figure shows how little they cared.

Oh and here's a real winner, juror Manual Ilagan, he says to cnet: "It didn't dawn on us [that we agreed that Samsung had infringed] on the first day,"
Well isn't that special.

Then the jury foreman says: "We wanted to make sure the message we sent was not just a slap on the wrist,"..."We wanted to make sure it was sufficiently high to be painful, but not unreasonable."

Well isn't that special too, considering they were instructed to "...keep in mind that the damages you award are meant to compensate the patent holder and not to punish an infringer."
There's your incompetence right there.

Yeah and it gets worse the more you read about it and hear these jurors talk.
I don't know shlt about patent law, but when a judge like Judge Posner thinks it's a complete joke, I'll go with the guy who knows what he's talking about.

 

[nuckinfutz]

Is there any reason to assume that another Jury would have come to a different conclusion?

 

[ixodes]

Heavily Pro-Apple going in, I'm not surprised they rushed reaching a verdict. Apple mastered the art of influence long ago.

 

[DanteMann]

Is there any reason to assume that another Jury would have come to a different conclusion?

Wow, just keep on sippin'

 

[boss.king]

Its never over. Neither side will ever give in to the other.

 

[nuckinfutz]

Its never over. Neither side will ever give in to the other.

No it's never over but Apple's got a lot of money and the verdict puts them in the drivers seat.

Hoping a judge tries to reverse the decision is like hoping you get a Unicorn for Christmas. If a Judge didn't stick his/her neck out during the OJ trial nothing is going to happen here.

 

[Timzer]

No it's never over but Apple's got a lot of money and the verdict puts them in the drivers seat.

Hoping a judge tries to reverse the decision is like hoping you get a Unicorn for Christmas. If a Judge didn't stick his/her neck out during the OJ trial nothing is going to happen here.

I love how you keep spinning in circles. Yet you don't comment on this jury that is now exposing itself for their incompetence. What's your opinion on this?
I'm sure you've read the post above that shows some of their own words about the case and their mindset since day one of the trial. So what's your opinion? Do you think they were incompetent?

 

[nuckinfutz]

I love how you keep spinning in circles. Yet you don't comment on this jury that is now exposing itself for their incompetence. What's your opinion on this?
I'm sure you've read the post above that shows some of their own words about the case and their mindset since day one of the trial. So what's your opinion? Do you think they were incompetent?

I have said nothing in circles. My mother is an attorney. I don't look at legal issues the same as everyone. I was raised talking about legal issues and I can say that without looking at all the documents provided in testimony, listening to expert witnesses and otherwise participating in the case you have no foundation to build a hypothesis of jury incompetence.

I don't think the Jury was incompetent based on their answers. Being a juror doesn't mean you're an automaton that cannot form opinion and your job is to decide on punitive damages.

 

[boss.king]

No it's never over but Apple's got a lot of money and the verdict puts them in the drivers seat.

Hoping a judge tries to reverse the decision is like hoping you get a Unicorn for Christmas. If a Judge didn't stick his/her neck out during the OJ trial nothing is going to happen here.

Yeah, Apple won this round. Then comes the appeal, and regardless of what happens there, I predict it will still continue. These are both incredibly wealthy companies. They can fight this out for decades.

 

[roadbloc]

No it's never over but Apple's got a lot of money and the verdict puts them in the drivers seat.

That 1 billion was mere pocket change for both companies. Apple isn't in any driver's seat. Samsung will appeal or sue some other time and before they know it they'll have the billion back. Or maybe it will end up going to Google. Or someone else.

The thing is about these lawsuits, they're actually going to change very little of what has already been occurring.

 

[nuckinfutz]

That 1 billion was mere pocket change for both companies. Apple isn't in any driver's seat. Samsung will appeal or sue some other time and before they know it they'll have the billion back. Or maybe it will end up going to Google. Or someone else.

The thing is about these lawsuits, they're actually going to change very little of what has already been occurring.

You severely underestimate the prowess of Apple's Legal Team. If you win a Jury trial you are in fact in the drivers seat. Appeals are the more difficult road and not guaranteed unless sufficient reason for an appeal can be established.

 

[anonymouslurker]

The thing is about these lawsuits, they're actually going to change very little of what has already been occurring.

There's hope that this whole fiasco could at least point out the flaws in our current patent system, and rally people to revise it. That's the only change that could come of this that would benefit companies and consumers.

 

[thekev]

I have said nothing in circles. My mother is an attorney. I don't look at legal issues the same as everyone. I was raised talking about legal issues and I can say that without looking at all the documents provided in testimony, listening to expert witnesses and otherwise participating in the case you have no foundation to build a hypothesis of jury incompetence.

Unless your mother worked in or at least discussed about corporate litigation, it's completely irrelevant. I doubt they'll appeal on the (obvious) jury incompetence. It's obvious as there wouldn't have been time to discuss that much material. No questions were asked. They were in over their heads here. I still doubt those will be the grounds on which they seek an appeal. They'll look for something else, but you're talking about a company that can afford a very large legal team.

 

[vrDrew]

Apple's battle against Samsung is far from over. Even the case in Northern California has at least a few months of Appeals process to go through. And there are literally dozens of cases in different Jurisdictions around the world.

But make no mistake about it: This verdict is a landmark event. The amount of damages may get adjusted down (or up). But barring something totally unforeseen, the case is likely to stand.

More importantly, with a Jury verdict in hand Apple can bring further pressure to bear on copying smartphone manufacturers. And those same companies are going to be painfully aware that they will be walking into a legal minefield if they continue to ship products that willfully infringe Apple's IP.

Contrary to what many around here are saying, though, this hardly means the "end of innovation" in the smartphone business. Far from it. In fact this means there will likely be more innovation - rather than less - as companies introduce new features that don't merely copy what Apple has done.

No doubt many of those innovations will fail. But you can be sure that at least some of them will succeed, giving consumers real choice and alternatives to the iPhone model of doing things.

 

[KnightWRX]

It's obvious as there wouldn't have been time to discuss that much material. No questions were asked. They were in over their heads here. I still doubt those will be the grounds on which they seek an appeal.

Exactly, they'll most likely appeal on the grounds of evidence that was refused by Judge Grewal and would have painted a much different story for prior art. After all, the Fiddler concept was enough to get the Galaxy Tab a non-infringement verdict on D'889, no reason to believe their unallowed evidence wouldn't have had a bigger impact.

However, do look for a Rule 50 (b) motion against the verdict directly to Judge Koh for the September 20th hearing. This motion will be based on what you've said here : quick deliberations, lack of following the instructions based on media comments and no questions asked to clarify these instructions.

----------

But barring something totally unforeseen, the case is likely to stand.

Or we can just look at the proceedings and see how Samsung is planning on overthrowing the verdict : Judge Grewal's handling of discovery. Quinn made quite a few statements about it already.

Don't be surprised if Samsung appeals on the grounds of disallowed evidence and asks for a retrial.

 

[darkplanets]

Wow, just keep on sippin'

Oh how many armchair lawyers there are on the Internet. Obviously you think you can do better, but you're also clearly biased. It's easy to sit from afar and be critical of others. It's harder to sit in their shoes and actually do the job. I would suggest you (and others) do some introspection on your actual worth and talents before you so harshly criticize others. What's your legal qualifications to judge?

The thing is, the jurors were vetted by both sides, as is practice. No one is to blame but the attorneys themselves. That is, of course, assuming that the jurors were even incompetent, as so many claim. It seems to be that those that scream "incompetency" have a large bias already. I fail to see how a few engineers and whatnot qualifies as incompetent -- fact is, this was probably a far more overqualified jury than the average given the location pool. Just because they devised a way to run through the data and claims quickly doesn't make them incompetent -- if anything they're clearly more qualified than you to handle such a situation.

The only thing they could possibly run on was the screening of evidence and what was and wasn't allowed. That would get a retrial, as per the prior art bits. I'm sure Samsung will get something on this ground, but that isn't jury incompetency.

What annoys me the most about all this senseless pandering (mine included) is that people bitch and bemoan like it's the end of the world. 1bn is chump change. This is all a giant chess game to get a global settlement. The phone industry will not change or die. Innovation will thrive more, not less. Unless you like having the same phone choice for every phone manufacture, I view this case as a win for the consumer. Now there has to be more REAL CHOICES, not just a "I look like you on the surface" clones. Bring on the W8 phones in the meantime.

 

[nuckinfutz]

Unless your mother worked in or at least discussed about corporate litigation, it's completely irrelevant. I doubt they'll appeal on the (obvious) jury incompetence. It's obvious as there wouldn't have been time to discuss that much material. No questions were asked. They were in over their heads here. I still doubt those will be the grounds on which they seek an appeal. They'll look for something else, but you're talking about a company that can afford a very large legal team.

People need to remember that both the plaintiff and defendant get to strike jurors during jury selection.

Proving incompetence by the jury can often point back to the attorney that had the chance to remove potential jurors that may be problematic.

 

[thekev]

People need to remember that both the plaintiff and defendant get to strike jurors during jury selection.

Proving incompetence by the jury can often point back to the attorney that had the chance to remove potential jurors that may be problematic.

I'm aware of the vetting process there. The companies ask questions. They each have a certain number of dismissals. I didn't give any kind of opinion on whether this would overturn their verdict. I don't know enough on the case or topic to give a good assessment there. Some of the quotes from those who served on that jury are also a bit lacking in context. They're isolated statements. My point was more that there's no way they could have reviewed and discussed that amount of material in that amount of time. I'm not aware whether they're putting in extra hours on this case. Even if it stretched to 10 hours a day (unlikely) that would have given the jury 1800 minutes to review 700 pages of material, deliberate on it, come to conclusions, and calculate damages. They couldn't have gone through everything and conducted reasonable deliberations in this time. Note that I'm not commenting on what will happen as a result of it. I'm merely pointing out that the math is not in their favor.

 

[smoledman]

Now there has to be more REAL CHOICES, not just a "I look like you on the surface" clones. Bring on the W8 phones in the meantime.

Apple doesn't care about Windows Phone as it has no market share. But IF it should ever start to eat into Apple's profits, watch out.

 

[boss.king]

Apple doesn't care about Windows Phone as it has no market share. But IF it should ever start to eat into Apple's profits, watch out.

For what?

 

[smoledman]

For what?

Lawsuits up the wazoo.

 

[boss.king]

Over what? Didn't Apple and Microsoft just finish a big cross-licensing deal? Having market share is not a justification to sue.