Jury Members Discuss Thought Process Behind Apple vs. Samsung Verdict

Discussion in 'MacRumors.com News Discussion' started by MacRumors, Aug 25, 2012.

  1. MacRumors macrumors bot


    Apr 12, 2001


    Reuters and CNet have interviewed members of the Apple / Samsung patent trial jury who awarded Apple over $1 billion in damages over patent infringement claims against Samsung.

    Reuters spoke with jury foreman Velvin Hogan who explained that they found Apple's arguments persuasive about the need to protect innovation. Furthermore, Hogan says it was "absolutely" clear based on Samsung executive testimony that the infringement was purposeful.

    In the CNet interview with another Apple v. Samsung juror, Manuel Ilagan reiterated that it was "clear there was infringement". When asked for specifics, he said:
    Both jurors claim that their decision was deliberate and not rushed. According to Ilagan, the process was helped by the experience within the jury pool. Hogan, the jury foreman, had previously worked as an engineer and holds a patent himself. Meanwhile, others on the jury were said to also have engineering and legal experience.

    In determining the award amount, Hogan reports that they felt Apple's demands of $2.75 billion was "extraordinarily high", especially taking into account the uncertainty in Apple's ability to have sold significantly more iPhones due to component supply constraints. That said, Hogan told Reuters they did want a send a message.
    Article Link: Jury Members Discuss Thought Process Behind Apple vs. Samsung Verdict
  2. linkgx1 macrumors 68000

    Oct 12, 2011
    Manuel Ilagan, that is NOT evidence in regards to what you were supposed to decided on.:rolleyes:

    Apparently Coca-Cola should sue Pepsi for Sierra Mist because they decided they want a lemon-lime soda like Sprite.
  3. spacehog371 macrumors regular

    Dec 13, 2003
    This well thought out explanation is going to frustrate critics who want to blame an ignorant jury for what happened.
  4. Mavrack macrumors member


    Jun 2, 2011
    I think they made the right decision. Samsung clearly copied and infringed on Apple's patents, Apple told them to stop many times, offered to licence it to them but Samsung still refused to cooperate so Apple sued them. Serves them right.
  5. zorinlynx macrumors 603


    May 31, 2007
    Florida, USA
    This is a sad day. And I say this as an Apple fan.

    I love their products, but they seem to be turning into bigger and bigger control freaks as time goes on. I'm worried about Apple becoming *too successful*, because if they do they are likely to engage in monopolistic practices, which still stifle innovation and give people little choice in platform.

    Apple really needs to learn to play well with others.
  6. Rogifan macrumors Core


    Nov 14, 2011
    Nah people will just say they're Steve Jobs worshiping douche bags.
  7. spazzcat macrumors 68030


    Jun 29, 2007
    I still don't understand how stopping Samsung from coping Apple is stifling innovation...
  8. Robincognito macrumors newbie

    Feb 5, 2011
    Ultimately, I think this is bad for consumers. Apple weren't patenting inventions. They were patenting generic design features. The whole patent system needs overhauling.

    Edit: Fortunately, it's not as though Samsung can't afford it.
  9. iSee macrumors 68040


    Oct 25, 2004
    Uh, the jury needs to consider all the evidence presented at trial. It's a little strange that you feel you can redefine the rules of evidence used at trial in an internet forum.
  10. Michael Scrip macrumors 603

    Mar 4, 2011
    That's only if Coca-Cola had a patent on lemon-lime soda. I don't think they do.

    However... Apple has tons of patents and trade-dress examples.

    Who knew you could patent all that stuff? Apple did... and now they are defending them.

    You can't blame Apple for using the broken patent system...
  11. cvaldes, Aug 25, 2012
    Last edited: Aug 25, 2012

    cvaldes macrumors 68040

    Dec 14, 2006
    somewhere else
    What this jury verdict says is that Apple has the right to protect their intellectual property and that Samsung is guilty of lifting Apple's innovation despite the fact that Apple had offered Samsung several times to license their property.

    I will also point out that Samsung is the worldwide leader in unit marketshare of smartphones.


    Samsung dominates the market by selling lots of devices that -- according to this jury -- are crammed full of Apple intellectual property. Apple has a long way to go to reach what would be a monopoly.

    You should understand that the jury members are interpreting US patent law and aren't employees of Apple Inc. nor Samsung. As a matter of fact, any Apple or Samsung employees would have been weeded out during the jury selection process.

    The jury is not telling anyone to stop innovating. They are telling Samsung to do their own innovation and not to steal stuff from Apple and saying it is theirs. Due to the lack of congressional foresight, current patent law has no actionable provision for "finders keepers, losers weepers" or "share your toys with the other kids in the sandbox."

    Now, if you think the US patent system is broken, that's an entirely different (and arguably valid) discussion, however the jury is instructed to base their verdict on existing and active law.

    These laws weren't written to favor one specific company (like Apple, Coca-Cola, Microsoft, Wonderbra, whoever).

    You have understood nothing about this entire legal action.
  12. Iconoclysm macrumors 68020


    May 13, 2010
    Washington, DC
    And they would definitely sue Pepsi if they copied.


    Samsung is the one that needs to learn to play well with others - this has been going on for years and years with them.
  13. Foxykhat macrumors member

    Nov 12, 2010
    I guess people should just be allowed to rip you off, in order to out sell you and you not do anything about it.

    Patents are put in place for a reason. If someone else want to use them then they must obtain the proper rights.

  14. Dorje Sylas macrumors 6502

    Jun 8, 2011
    I think one of the points that came out in this case was that Apple did try to play nice (as nice as any company gets), but Samsung blew them off. If Samsung hadn't been so quick to write Apples offers off they wouldn't be out a billion dollars and looking a possible ban on a number of their products.
  15. Iconoclysm macrumors 68020


    May 13, 2010
    Washington, DC
    Who knew? Everyone knows. And everyone would enforce it when it needs to. The patent system may be "broken" but it found a guilty party guilty in this trial and that's really all that matters right now.
  16. bazinga!! macrumors regular


    Apr 25, 2012
    Steve Jobs was already suing Samsung many years before this, so saying that Apple is turning into a bigger control freak is wrong. It is right to say that Samsung is turning into a bigger and bigger copycat as time goes on, as they can't seem to find a way to undermine the success of the iPhone.

    And the purpose of patents is to give a temporary monopoly! If it wasn't for patent law, companies would innovate too little, because it would be too easy to copy each others inventions.
  17. cyberddot macrumors 6502


    Jul 4, 2003
    in a forest
    The patent system is the problem, not the jury, or Apple/Samsung.
    This is a pebble, or maybe a boulder, on a mountain of wrong.
  18. Ironduke Suspended


    Nov 12, 2006
    This was a patriotic Decision

    America is so Corrupt
  19. Serge88 macrumors member


    May 5, 2008
  20. cmChimera macrumors 68040


    Feb 12, 2010
    Yes it is. Some of the case was trade dress. If it looks like they deliberately made a product mimicking someone else's, then it is infringement.

    To everyone complaining about a broken patent system, what exactly is broken? And are you sure you're not confusing trade dress claims with patent claims? I would never make the case that ANY section of law such as patents, copyrights, criminal, etc. are perfect, but it seems so ridiculous to me that there are a bunch of people acting like they somehow are now patent law experts claiming the system is broken. It's not.
  21. Peace macrumors Core


    Apr 1, 2005
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    Why would he be biased toward Apple just because he holds a patent ? That is a very closed minded view. Samsung has patents too so why wouldn't he be biased toward Samsung ?
  22. makingdots, Aug 25, 2012
    Last edited: Aug 25, 2012

    makingdots macrumors 6502

    Aug 14, 2008
    Bratty little whinny kids in 3, 2, 1..

    They are like the ones in school that can't copy the smart kid in class and get away with it. Bunch of punks supporting the belief that taking a free ride off of someone else's work is the way to go.
  23. dotme macrumors 6502a

    Oct 18, 2011
    I think they do play well with companies who license their technologies.

    Problem is, Samsung didn't do that. They could have - but chose not to. It's not unlike Internet radio. Pay the royalties, or deal with the penalties.

  24. Mark Booth macrumors 68000

    Mark Booth

    Jan 16, 2008
  25. gotluck macrumors 603


    Dec 8, 2011
    East Central Florida

Share This Page