Why is none of this objective in determining guilty or not? I guess I'm wondering why Samsung is guilty in one country but not the other of the same accusations.
Do we agree Samsung copied Apple's Mac-mini concept and product design?
Do we agree Samsung copied Apple's Mac-mini concept and product design?
The concept looks slightly similar but the design is completely different. Again, just have to say I wasn't actually being serious with my post; just trying to boost the mood in this thread.
Sure it does! It's a blatant copy... from the bottom. You know, the part that never shows and no one ever really bothers to look at ?![]()
If courts decide that Samsung infringes it means that Samsung didn't innovate and they copied.
If courts decide that Samsung doesn't infringe it means that Samsung innovate and they didn't copied, no?
accept for diehard fanboys there seems to be plenty of backlash towards apple by consumers. They are coming off as bullies to many of us. lisa, imac, ipod touch, ipod shuffle.
Wasn't Samsung involved in jury selection? Would be hard to appeal on jury incompetence when they helped select the jury. But I'm sure Apple wishes he'd just ****.
Madness. Insanity.
Jurors should remain anonymous, and the media should be barred from interviewing them.
Anything else is contempt of court.
No wonder the US legal system is broken. You have even turned your court system into infotainment ...
No it means that they took the advice of a patent holder thinking he was a patent expert - something this guy clearly isn't. In other words they were dumb and stupid. He should not have been allowed on the jury. The judge should have dismissed him at the very start of the selection process.
He took control and swayed the others with his own bias. They didn't give the 700 questions adequate thought, let alone pay attention to what the judge was telling them.
He needs to shut up, in fact all of the jurors should have kept their mouths shut, but I guess everyone wants 2 minutes of fame.
He needs to hope that his patent hasn't been used by any company with a connection to Apple. Otherwise he will be in a whole world of hurt.
I am summerizing. Here is the link to the instructions.
http://www.groklaw.net/pdf3/ApplevSamsung-1903.pdf
The relavant text:
And so what? If the sentence gets overturned on appeal (which is perfecty possible), then all 9 of them ultimately voted wrong.
When it can take months for experts to evaluate even a single patent's validity? A bit, maybe, but a bit is not enough.
The jury system is well known to have huge drawbacks, especially in these kind of cases. In my opinion it's simply pointless to try and get a jury educated enough to decide these matters, also because many will simply decide based on emotions instead of rational thinking, or follow what the few influential jurors push.
You miss the point. They decided the prior art of one of the patent was not relevant because it did not run on the same processor of Apple's patent. This is obviously not a good reason to ignore prior art and the jury was clearly instructed about that.
It could still be that the prior art proposed does not invalidate Apple's patent in question, but the jury decided this using a completely incorrect rationale.
I hope you know 3 weeks of arguing and 3 days of deliberations are two differnet things ENTIRELY.
Remeber the OJ trial? One tiny glove changed everything for "Juice".
It is the DUTY of the jury to analyze EVERYTHING to the best of their ability (not because some foreman said something).
Being the 'most informed' means nothing if you ignore the rules you were given
So....
Then the jury, or more likely your assumption of what the jury thought they were there for is wrong.
Wrong again...
They were tasked with determining infringement as well as determine patent validity.
One can be found to infringe, but if the patent is deemed invalid, the infringement becomes moot. Willful or not.
Prior art would not have been presented in the case if infringement was the only thing being determined.
The foreman applied the incorrect analysis when looking at prior art... plain and simple.
He managed to convince the rest of the jury that his premise was correct.
Lol cases are not overturned for juries voting wrong.
RIM let off $147m hook as judge overturns Mformation ruling
Summary: A jury was wrong to find last month that the BlackBerry firm infringed on Mformation's remote device management patent, a California judge has established.
"A US judge has overturned a ruling last month, in which a jury said Research In Motion had infringed on a patent held by the device management firm Mformation.
"In July, a Californian jury said RIM should pay Mformation $147.2m (£94m) because BlackBerry Enterprise Server (BES) infringed on an Mformation patent covering remote device management from a server. The figure was based on a retrospective royalty of $8 per BES unit sold.
"However, RIM appealed, and on Thursday it said Judge James Ware had agreed with it, "concluding that the evidence did not support the jury's finding of patent infringement."
You mean Samsung failed to properly make their case on prior art. The burden was on samsungs lawyers to provide that evidence not the jury.
They given instructions not rules
Lol cases are not overturned for juries voting wrong.
Lol cases are not overturned for juries voting wrong.
But how about for juries not following the instructions?
This verdict is just the first skirmish in what will be a long-running soap opera.
...and the final outcome could be quite the opposite of this first, apparently flawed, verdict.
I'd argue that Apple's goal is to keep things off the market as long as possible. If that is what happens, it's clearly in their favor regardless of final verdicts. None of the bonds have been terribly substantial.
But everything is still on the market, and the phones that could be banned are mostly older phones - so even if the judge ignores the flawed verdict and bans the older phones, it won't have much effect on the competitive landscape.
Lol you don't actually have any idea how the nine jurors reached their collective decision. It is much more likely a juror is misspeaking after the fact and without the assistance of the actual documents and other jurors.
It is funny to me that people and even worse lawyers think jury deliberations are somehow subjected to extreme scrutiny when it comes to an appeal.
Most professionals agree that the issue was too complicated to be decided so fast even by people deep into the matter.
So much so that the law has already been changed in the US to give the defendants a choice to have to face a jury for these types of case. Unfortunately for Samsung, the law goes into effect only on the 16th of September of this year.