Jury Members Discuss Thought Process Behind Apple vs. Samsung Verdict

[mac00l]

I remember Motorola's Startac, Razr and some other major clamshell amazing phones.
I remember Nokia's bricks with major flagships such as the 5110, N95, etc....
I remember HTC's first touch phones.
I remember Sony-Ericcson's first color cellphone.
I remember LG's Chocolate line which was really elegant.
I remember Blackberry's full keyboards and bbm.

I don't remember anything important that Samsung has ever done to the phone's industry. The only thing I remember Samsung for, is for selling all their phones in metallic grey color before the iPhone was launch.

 

[GerritV]

Up to you Samsung, show us how innovative you can be, and make an amazing product from scratch.

 

[anthony11]

This was a patriotic Decision

America is so Corrupt

Would you say the same about Samsung happening to win a similar suit in Korea?

----------

How much louder will the Apple-haters whine when/if Apple asks for (and the judge grants) treble damages?!

http://gigaom.com/2012/08/24/triple-damages-and-injunctions-what-next-for-apple-and-samsung/

3.15 BILLION DOLLARS! Muha ha ha!

Mark

How often does the full amount of an award actually end up being paid? I have a feeling that with appeals and whatever other legal / accounting foo goes on that the actual $ transfer might tend to be much less.

 

[Gasu E.]

Manuel Ilagan, that is NOT evidence in regards to what you were supposed to decided on.
.

They were supposed to decide both whether infringement happened AND whether there was willful intent. The evidence cited does in fact support a conclusion of willful intent.

 

[anthony11]

Exactly. It's this protection that ENCOURAGES innovation. Why would anyone spend a great deal of time, money, and effort to innovate if they knew that anyone could come along and simply copy what they did to make a profit?

I think there's a difference between actual innovation and run-of-the-mill work and choices.

----------

$1B is nothing for Samsung, they made much more than that stealing designs and ideas from innovative businesses (not only Apple).

... and cheaping out on their manufacturing. I bought a pricy Samsung DLP TV a handful of years ago. It performed well -- until the light tunnel collapsed. I researched the problem, and it turns out that the mirrors inside the thing were attached with *double sided tape*. It turns out that there had been a class action suit against Samsung for this (which I wish I'd heard about sooner) with a settlement that ran out two weeks before I called them. They refused to do anything to help me out, even pretending that the problem didn't exist until I pointed them directly at the settlement. My $4500 purchase had become trash that most people wanted $50 to haul away. Samsung thus disqualified themselves from any purchases I may make in the future. I'd be happy to see them spanked in court this way even if I weren't an AAPL stockholder.

----------

Everybody likes to back an underdog (Samsung)

Samsung Electronics employs 200,000 people around the world. Perhaps "underdog" means something different on your planet.

If other companies like Microsoft and RIM can bring out new Tablets/Smartphones

RIM has never come out with anything that deserves the description "smart".

----------

With a jury full of americans deciding the fate of multinationals.

US courts do not have jurisdiction outside the US. This case concerns the sale of products within the US, not Samsung's worldwide business.

Now if you started like that from the outset. Some might say the deck is stacked...

Like the court in Korea who sided with Samsung? Did you wring your hands over that one?

----------

Because you're not American, you're anti-American.

.. and most likely a snaggletoothed smoker to boot.

 

[Mark Booth]

How often does the full amount of an award actually end up being paid? I have a feeling that with appeals and whatever other legal / accounting foo goes on that the actual $ transfer might tend to be much less.

I don't know... how often was it that the most valuable company in the world was on the receiving end of those judgements? How often was it that these other companies had declared thermonuclear war on their copying and infringing competition?

The big question is whether or not the judge will award treble damages. Or, for that matter, whether Apple will even request treble damages. Where the dust eventually settles will be somewhat reliant on where the upper figure starts.

Mark

 

[anthony11]

I think the patent system needs reform.

Agreed.

That said... Apple followed the rules as they are written today and are defending the patents they obtained under this patent system.

Agreed. Apple did what is necessary to stay in business these days. Is it pretty? No. Were Apple to not defend their patents, you can be sure that their competitors would still do so. At best it's checks & balances. At worst it's an arms race.

----------

The smaller companies could never compete and Apple could finally charge what they want for a phone and people would just pay it.

You think they aren't already doing so?

----------

Lets be honest here....I got the Samsung Vibrant because it was the closest thing to the iPhone I could get...and it was $50.

The initial "cost" of a phone is a small fraction of the cost over its lifetime. Back when I was in the snake world, if someone whine about the (more than reasonable) $20 I was asking for a hatchling because they didn't have the money, I'd respond by saying that they thus must not be able to afford proper housing and food, and that as such they should beat it.

----------

Opinions are like arseholes... Everyone has one...

Nope, just people in England. The rest of us don't want to get beat up in school by saying "arse" instead of "ass".

----------

You know America has history of getting it's own way regardless of what anyone else says.

The people in south Vietnam that we abandoned might disagree.

 

[lazard]

I don't know... how often was it that the most valuable company in the world was on the receiving end of those judgements? How often was it that these other companies had declared thermonuclear war on their copying and infringing competition?

The big question is whether or not the judge will award treble damages. Or, for that matter, whether Apple will even request treble damages. Where the dust eventually settles will be somewhat reliant on where the upper figure starts.

Mark

Highly doubt the $1.05B will stick.

"We wanted to make sure the message we sent was not just a slap on the wrist," Hogan said. "We wanted to make sure it was sufficiently high to be painful, but not unreasonable."

Per the jury instructions:

The amount of those damages must be adequate to compensate the patent holder for the infringement. A damages award should put the patent holder in approximately the financial position it would have been in had the infringement not occurred, but in no event may the damages award be less than a reasonable royalty. You should keep in mind that the damages you award are meant to compensate the patent holder and not to punish an infringer.

 

[anthony11]

So Apple did a better job with the iPhone that made it worth copying.

Damn straight they did. They made a phone that could successfully sync contacts and calendars with a computer. Before the iPhone I couldn't find any phone that could.

----------

Did you even read the link to the CNET story?

Anyone who's visited CNET over the years wouldn't bother.

 

[Mark Booth]

Highly doubt the $1.05B will stick.

At the bare minimum, I expect the judge to reduce the jury's award to $500 million and then triple it.

The final total will be $1.5 billion at minimum.

Mark

 

[anthony11]

Or those who think Samsung will increase their costs to Apple, No.

Samsung isn't going to screw Apple on their other business contracts, that would be cutting off their nose to spite their face. Not to mention that those contracts are already signed...

If they did, there's no shortage of other suppliers who'd give their [metaphorical] left nuts to sell to Apple. Plus I suspect that whatever division/company of Samsung that sells phones is substantially disjoint from whoever makes chips or any other part of Apple products. I once worked for a company who competed with Hitachi outside of the US in a certain market. That didn't stop Hitachi from building our backplanes.

 

[Snowy_River]

... the mirrors inside the thing were attached with *double sided tape*...

Were you aware that there are airplanes that have skin plates held on with double sided tape? Most fire engines have various panels held on this way, too. There's nothing wrong with attaching things with double sided tape, so long as you use the right kind of double sided tape...

 

[Judas1]

Ugh, the jury is supposed to be intelligent, but they based their decision on that piece of **** evidence that Apple provided where they cherry picked the most different looking Samsung phones that appeared before the iphone, and then cherry picked the ones that looked the most like the iphone after the iphone. Of course you will find what you're looking for cherry picking from the hundreds of phones Samsung seems to producing. They don't seem to be that intelligent.

 

[MxMsk]

I don't remember anything important that Samsung has ever done to the phone's industry. The only thing I remember Samsung for, is for selling all their phones in metallic grey color before the iPhone was launch.

Maybe Samsung never looked innovative in USA but in Europe and Asia. I remember how exciting was Samsung C100 which costed very cheap but offered a beautiful color screen and good quality polyphony. Samsung D500 was an amazing slider. From some point of view it was an iPhone of its time.

Also dont forget that Samsung had many research in OLED screen technology.

As of 2006, it held more than 600 American patents and more than 2,800 international patents, making it the largest owner of AMOLED technology patents

Have a look Samsung page on Wiki.You will find that this company develop and produce a huge range of products which influence mobile market directly or indirectly.

Saying that Samsung is only a copycat is a terrible lie

 

[r3m1]

Ugh, the jury is supposed to be intelligent, but they based their decision on that piece of **** evidence that Apple provided where they cherry picked the most different looking Samsung phones that appeared before the iphone, and then cherry picked the ones that looked the most like the iphone after the iphone. Of course you will find what you're looking for cherry picking from the hundreds of phones Samsung seems to producing. They don't seem to be that intelligent.

The Guardian (UK) put it like this:

"A US jury has rubberstamped Apple's exploitation of the patent system.", and "A home-town jury has given Apple the world, or at least the United States, in its campaign to control the smart phone and tablet markets.".

A sad day indeed ...

 

[gr8tfly]

Ugh, the jury is supposed to be intelligent, but they based their decision on that piece of **** evidence that Apple provided where they cherry picked the most different looking Samsung phones that appeared before the iphone, and then cherry picked the ones that looked the most like the iphone after the iphone. Of course you will find what you're looking for cherry picking from the hundreds of phones Samsung seems to producing. They don't seem to be that intelligent.

Of course they would. It's the lawyers' job to present evidence in the most convincing form for the judge/jury. That's what they get the big bucks for. I'll go out on a limb here and suggest you haven't needed to hire a lawyer to defend yourself (civil or otherwise).

 

[Ironduke]

No doubt. The Europeans are socialists. They mostly believe everything should belong to the government to be handed out to the "community" to make sure everything is equal. You can't be surprised they are against the idea of profit and protecting "individual" companies property. Profits and the word "individual" are considered profane over there, and becoming that way here too. Mores the pity.

Spot the right wing republican, europe is nothing like that Romney boy

 

[bushman4]

Would have so much easier for Samsung to just license the technology from Apple. But of course there's that horrible word 'greed' which persues companies to beat each other in the hopes one company will not challenge the other.
Hopefully the judge doubles or triples the the award to show she stands behind the law 'wilfull' and intent of Samsungs copying of Apples patents

 

[Ironduke]

The Guardian (UK) put it like this:

"A US jury has rubberstamped Apple's exploitation of the patent system.", and "A home-town jury has given Apple the world, or at least the United States, in its campaign to control the smart phone and tablet markets.".

A sad day indeed ...

So True

 

[wikus]

The fact that law suits like this can go on and Apple is continually granted the absolute most ridiculous patents I've ever seen in my life is beyond disturbing.

This.

But I find that description quite modest. I think its total effing horsehockey. They got a patent on something as obvious as 'pinch to zoom' ??? My dad, who is technologically inept and has never used a smartphone ever of any kind saw my HTC Glacier for the first time when I was showing him some pictures on the phone. When he wanted to zoom, on his own he pinched to zoom and I asked 'uh, how did you know to zoom like that?'

His response: Because... it just felt obvious.

And thats where Apple should never have gotten these ridiculous patents. None of them are anything special, all of those patents are obvious features. That bounce effect when scrolling down a page is just like a ball falling down and bouncing back up or a stack of papers falling down and bending as it lands.

I can't believe how obsessed apple fanboys are over this either though, its the most disgusting loyalty to a brand Ive ever witnessed and its largely in north america where branding is more important than quality because anything branded is assumed as quality here. But why would anyone want to protect and glorify a company that wants to limit competition, choice and innovation (save for its own) and rape the consumer with their artificially inflated prices? All to just show off their deep connection to a logo as if it gives them social status?

I'm absolutely disgusted by what Apple has become... it used to be the superior underdog but now its become everything theyve stood against starting from their ridiculously hypocritical 1984 commercial;

 

[thasan]

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.

eh, samsung stole from apple and u want to encourage them?
no one is doing that to microsoft for example.
look at nokias new phones...they arent good in features but the designs are distinctive and fantastic to be honest.
msfts surface also redefines what a tablet should look like.
whereas samsung spent like nothing for their designs and just came up with a proven and patented apple design and approach. why should samsung be allowed to steal?

----------

At the bare minimum, I expect the judge to reduce the jury's award to $500 million and then triple it.

The final total will be $1.5 billion at minimum.

Mark

i hope its 800 mil and then tripled...reaching close to 2.5

 

[gr8tfly]

The Guardian (UK) put it like this:

"A US jury has rubberstamped Apple's exploitation of the patent system.", and "A home-town jury has given Apple the world, or at least the United States, in its campaign to control the smart phone and tablet markets.".

A sad day indeed ...

Link to article? Hard to comment on out-of-context statements.

That aside, how are jurors picked in the UK?

Both sides get to voir dire prospects from (iirc) 72 in the original pool, down to 9 (plus some alternates). From what I've read, the process here requires less stringent justification than other countries. For instance, either side can have a certain number dismissed for no reason - something not done in the UK. That means that, if anything, a jury here is likely more balanced [between parties].

 

[Marx55]

The theft was so obvious. Sansung: innovate or pay. Full stop!

And... have fun...

Conan O’Brien Breaks Down The Apple/Samsung Trial [VIDEO]
http://techcrunch.com/2012/08/08/conan-obrien-breaks-down-the-applesamsung-trial-video

 

[GadgetDon]

This.

But I find that description quite modest. I think its total effing horsehockey. They got a patent on something as obvious as 'pinch to zoom' ??? My dad, who is technologically inept and has never used a smartphone ever of any kind saw my HTC Glacier for the first time when I was showing him some pictures on the phone. When he wanted to zoom, on his own he pinched to zoom and I asked 'uh, how did you know to zoom like that?'

His response: Because... it just felt obvious.

And thats where Apple should never have gotten these ridiculous patents. None of them are anything special, all of those patents are obvious features. That bounce effect when scrolling down a page is just like a ball falling down and bouncing back up or a stack of papers falling down and bending as it lands.

They were completely obvious, which is why every phone before the iPhone had them.

Oh, wait, THEY DIDN'T.

Just like using a click wheel to pick from a scrolling list was an obvious solution to working with a large music library. But nobody did it before Apple.

That's the process Apple goes through, tries a hundred different options, tests them on real people, sees what they do when they fiddle with a device, and eventually comes up with an interface that is "obvious".

 

[wikus]

They were completely obvious, which is why every phone before the iPhone had them.

Oh, wait, THEY DIDN'T.

Just like using a click wheel to pick from a scrolling list was an obvious solution to working with a large music library. But nobody did it before Apple.

That's the process Apple goes through, tries a hundred different options, tests them on real people, sees what they do when they fiddle with a device, and eventually comes up with an interface that is "obvious".

It would be greatly appreciated if you didn't skew reality to your own liking.

Secondly, a grid of icons ALWAYS existed before the iPhone as did many of the other idiotic 'patents'. Rounded corners??? Are you kidding me?