APPLE/SAMSUNG VERDICT : LIVE NOW 6PM Friday Aug 24

[BStecke]

Originally Posted by Bizdady

Your starting to sound like a true fanboy.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy SIII using Tapatalk

*You're

I love the "fanboy" taunts. Reeks of class and intelligence. Without the iPhone, the chances of you having that Galaxy are pretty slim.

[Bizdady]

Originally Posted by BStecke

*You're

I love the "fanboy" taunts. Reeks of class and intelligence. Without the iPhone, the chances of you having that Galaxy are pretty slim.

Im not here to get into arguments but its very clear the jury didn't even read the instructions. Its pretty obvious they had no idea what they were doing and the juror foreman influenced the decision.

The foreman even told a court representative that the jurors had reached a decision without needing the instructions. Ya

[MEB]

A tweet by MacWorld senior editor Dan Frakes inspired me to sharpen my blog pencil:

http://markshangout.com/blog/2012/8/...ng-whines.html

Mark

[jayturner514]

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...38&postcount=5

Wow, I was actually right.

[kemcha]

I love how the media are portraying this as a win when the jury comes back with a verdict that had nothing to do with the lawsuit. If Judge Koh doesn't toss the verdict out and declare a mistrial, I suspect that an appeals court will order a new trial anyway.

The jury disregarded the court's instruction. That's like going to court for assaulting a police officer and the jury convicts you of murder. Judge Koh is definitely in the hot seat over this, despite the fact that she's been an Apple fan throughout this trial. But she cannot ignore the fact that the jury screwed up. I'd hate to say it, but they did.

[xtop]

Originally Posted by kemcha

I love how the media are portraying this as a win when the jury comes back with a verdict that had nothing to do with the lawsuit. If Judge Koh doesn't toss the verdict out and declare a mistrial, I suspect that an appeals court will order a new trial anyway.

The jury disregarded the court's instruction. That's like going to court for assaulting a police officer and the jury convicts you of murder. Judge Koh is definitely in the hot seat over this, despite the fact that she's been an Apple fan throughout this trial. But she cannot ignore the fact that the jury screwed up. I'd hate to say it, but they did.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57...or-speaks-out/

"It didn't dawn on us [that we agreed that Samsung had infringed] on the first day," Ilagan said. "We were debating heavily, especially about the patents on bounce-back and pinch-to-zoom. Apple said they owned patents, but we were debating about the prior art [about similar technology that Samsung said existed before the iPhone debuted]. [Velvin] Hogan was jury foreman. He had experience. He owned patents himself...so he took us through his experience. After that it was easier. After we debated that first patent -- what was prior art --because we had a hard time believing there was no prior art."
"In fact we skipped that one," Ilagan continued, "so we could go on faster. It was bogging us down."

what..there's a problem with that?

[xtop]

i don't think anything is going to change for samsung though. they'll have to pay up, and they should have to pay up for some of it anyways, like i've been saying.

lets hope this gets some movement into changing the patent system

[kemcha]

I think you're missing the point. Company's discuss about incorporating designs into their products all the time but you cannot patent a design like "rounded edges" on an eye-phone. It's one the dumbest things I have ever heard of patenting something that is so generic. That's Apple's way of saying we did it first so no phone can have rounded edges.

We can all speculate until time freeze over but ultimately it's up to the appeals court to decide what's what. In the meantime, we can expect this process to drag out for several more years.

What I'm seeing is that we have two behemoths fighting each other over dumb crap and that's all it is. It doesn't matter who wins, in the end, both companies are going to lose. Not just with consumers who are tired of this kind of endless bickering but even with the patent system itself. Apple is simply digging itself a hole it cannot get out of because even if they ultimately win, they'll have alienated their consumers.

Apple has great products, there's no denying that, but Apple maintains such a rigid and tight hold on its patents that its trying to prevent competition. What's great about Samsung's products is that not only does it give consumers more good products to choose from but that if consumers see that Samsung's smartphones aren't all that great, then Apple wins in the end with consumers.

I just don't think this is about patents, I think it's more about Apple maintaining their massive profits as well as keeping their products at premium prices. There are many consumers who would like to purchase more Apple products like an iMac, iPod Touch and iPhones but that they're priced too high. I don't mind paying for something if it's worth it, but Apple has made their products so dependent on Apple services.

Take a look at the iPhone, iPod Classic and iPod Touch. These are devices where you should be able to walk into any retailer or shop online and be able to change the battery or the hard drive simply as you would do with any PC desktop or walkman. But, with their iPod and iPhone products, you actually have to send it into Apple to replace the battery or hard drive. It's not something where you can open the device easily.

This has been the major complaint among owners of these devices. Plus, for the cost of a 64gb iPod Touch, you can buy a brand new PC desktop, whereas the low range of an Apple iMac is around $1,000. This is why the PC Desktop industry continues to thrive to this very day.

Apple simply needs to change the way it does business. After all, Apple can afford it and they really need to stop acting too aggressively regarding its products. They're doing nothing but making the lawyers rich and hurting their product image.

Just look at it, consumers are going to be the losers in the end, with Apple and Samsung shaking their heads at once another. This is more like a fight between two goliaths and poor David is stuck in the middle with no way to defend himself.

[kemcha]

Sorry for the double but it looks like there may have been jury misconduct in this case, after all. According to Techdirt, the jury foreman may have admitted to misconduct as well as ignoring the instructions that Judge Koh gave the jury.

The jury foreman remarked in an interview: "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."

Except, as Techdirt notes, that isn't what they were supposed to do. That patent awards are supposed to be all about infringement, not about punishing the defendant in this case, which was Samsung.

The article goes on about this but it appears that there may not be any choice but to declare a mistrial on account of misconduct by the jury. Check out the article, but it appears that the jury really screwed up:

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/201...-factors.shtml

[Bizdady]

“When I got in this case and I started looking at these patents I considered: ‘If this was my patent and I was accused, could I defend it?’” Hogan explained. On the night of Aug. 22, after closing arguments, “a light bulb went on in my head,” he said. “I thought, I need to do this for all of them.”

Sounds pretty biased to me.

Not to mention they just skipped over Prior Art instructions as it boggled them down.

"In fact we skipped that one," Ilagan continued, "so we could go on faster. It was bogging us down."

[kemcha]

The whole purpose of a jury trial is for a jury to decide on the facts of the case, not about what the jury thinks is fair. Judge Koh along with the jury, embarked on a dangerous path to punish Samsung for even fighting the lawsuit, her remarks to the jury "go back in there and fix it" is just wrong, on so many levels.

That's when Judge Koh should have set the verdict aside and declared a mistrial.

Not only should there be a new trial but that Judge Koh should not handle the new trial. They need to assign a judge that is going to fair and impartial and select a jury that will decide on the facts, and not their gut about what they thing is fair for an American company.

I'm all for Apple protecting their patents. However, this lawsuit has been nothing more than a "patent troll" lawsuit on the part of Apple. The jury should have deliberated on whether the actual patents were infringed, not whether how much Apple should get and it sounds like the jury had its mind made up before they even started deliberating.

[MEB]

I've updated my blog a couple more times regarding the trial.

Understanding Apple vs. Samsung

Mark

[kemcha]

This jury verdict keep getting more and more into far left field. Apparently, Samsung noticed even more inconsistencies when they received the amended jury verdict. According to Gizmodo:

in two instances, results were crazily contradictory, and the judge had to have the jury go back and fix the goofs. As a result the damages award was reduced to $1,049,343,540, 1 down from $1,051,855,000. For just one example, the jury had said one device didn't infringe, but then they awarded Apple $2 million for inducement. In another they awarded a couple of hundred thousand for a device they'd ruled didn't infringe at all

The jury appears to have awarded damages for the Galaxy Tab 10.1 LTE infringing—$219,694 worth—but didn't find that it had actually infringed anything....A similar inconsistency exists for the Intercept, for which they'd awarded Apple over $2 million

Intercept: "The jury found no direct infringement but did find inducement" for the '915 and '163 utility patents. If a device didn't infringe, it would be rather hard for a company to induce said non-existant infringement.

The foreman told a court representative that the jurors had reached a decision without needing the instructions.

Source: http://gizmodo.com/5938219/why-the-a...ay-not-hold-up

What's troubling about this, and there a lot of details in the article I linked to (including links to PDFs concerning the judge's instructions, the original Jury verdict, the amended verdict, and a lot of other related links), that there may have been blatant jury misconduct. By the comment from the jury foreman, "the jurors reached a decision without needing instructions", it just seems very likely that if Judge Koh doesn't set aside the verdict and declare a mis-trial that the Federal appeals court will likely vacate the jury verdict itself and order a new trial.

[MEB]

You do realize that the judge READ every line of the jury instructions to the jury, right? This is one of the topics that is covered in Bloomberg's interview of jury foreman, Vel Hogan:

Bloomberg Interviews Apple vs. Samsung Jury Foreman

Mark

[Navster]

Samsung's $1B bill in Apple case reduced by $450M

SAN JOSE, Calif. (AP) -- A federal judge on Friday erased nearly half of the $1 billion in damages that a jury decided that Samsung Electronics should pay Apple in a high-profile trial over the rights to the design and technology running some of the world's most popular smartphones and tablet computers.

U.S. District Court Judge Lucy Koh lowered the damages awarded to Apple Inc. by $450.5 million, saying jurors had not properly followed her instruction in calculating some of the damages. She also concluded that mistakes had been made in determining when Apple had first notified Samsung about the alleged violations of the patents for its trend-setting iPhone and IPad.

The ruling reduced Samsung Electronics' bill to just under $599 million.

Koh also ordered a new trial on Apple's allegations that Samsung stole its ideas for more than a dozen different smartphones and tablet computers that include several models in Samsung's hot-selling Galaxy line-up.

The new trial leaves open the possibility that Samsung's damages bill could rise back up toward $1 billion, or even higher, depending on the findings of a new jury.

[Johnny Vinyl]

Originally Posted by Navster

Samsung's $1B bill in Apple case reduced by $450M

Maybe these clowns will finally decide to settle, although I doubt they will.

Thanks a lot friends for sharing your useful tips and suggestions i really appreciate it.