Apple vs. Samsung lawsuit in the US

[MrMastodonFarm]

The press release from Apple was at the highest level of smug of seen from them in some time.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Azure

Microsoft only asks for $8-$10 per device from other manufacturers.

Microsoft didn't "ask" for royalties, they threatened HTC and Samsung with lawsuits if they didn't pay royalties. Microsoft is already suing companies (Motorola, Barnes & Noble, and a few others) who wouldn't agree to their royalty rates just like Apple did.

They also take in more than that per device from those companies. Most recent articles seem to have HTC paying $10 per phone and Samsung paying $12-13 (though I've read as high as $15).

[Azure]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

The press release from Apple was at the highest level of smug of seen from them in some time.

I especially like the stuff about innovating and being original.

As if they don't steal. Bunch of hypocrites.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

Yikes somebody's awfully butthurt...

Haha, Fanin80 making fun of someone else for being butthurt in a technology thread. Now I've seen everything.

[FlameOn]

Jury foreman admits they did not consider any prior art because "it was bogging us down". Fantastic to know that the jury was more concerned about getting out of the trial before the weekend rather than making a fair and impartial decision. Samsung is demanding that the decisions be overturned (rightfully) on this alone. Case is before the Judge's decision based on this admission.
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?s...25390&repost=1

[Regulator75]

Christ... Good job lazy Americans.

[FlameOn]

Originally Posted by Regulator75

Christ... Good job lazy Americans.

See, that's the problem I see with some jury trials in a lot of cases especially complex technical ones. The jury aren't legal experts and most aren't even technical experts. They will not be consider things like legal precedent nor be able to complete judge the technical merits of a lot of the complex issues being discussed. Jury trials rely on the assumption that the jury can, are willing and are motivated to make the best possible decision in cases. For example, if someone lacks the expertise to reform the tax system, they simply lack the mental tools necessary to be able to make a meaningful decision.

I guess this boils down to the relying on the mob to make the best decision. It's the reason the jury trials in technical cases don't work, same reason the patent system is currently broken, same reason that growing research is showing democracy isn't working very well.
http://www.lifeslittlemysteries.com/...democracy.html

Apparently because "Dumb people are too dumb to know it".
http://www.lifeslittlemysteries.com/...-ignorant.html

[Rathji]

I don't think determining patent violations is beyond the average individual. Sure there are bound to be some idiots in every bunch, but that's true of every situation.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by FlameOn

Jury foreman admits they did not consider any prior art because "it was bogging us down". Fantastic to know that the jury was more concerned about getting out of the trial before the weekend rather than making a fair and impartial decision. Samsung is demanding that the decisions be overturned (rightfully) on this alone. Case is before the Judge's decision based on this admission.
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?s...25390&repost=1

From the same article...

If the jury instructions [PDF] are as long and complex as they were in this case, a quick verdict can indeed mean it shirked its duty. For example, if the jury rushed so much it assigned $2 million dollars to Apple, and then had to subtract it because there was no infringement, it raises a valid question: what was the basis for any of the damages figures the jury came up with? If they had any actual basis, how could they goof like this? Was there a factual basis for any of the damages figures?

Exactly what I was talking about earlier. If they screwed up on two things, and assigned damages despite finding no infringement, whats to say that they just randomly award damages for other things as well and never bothered to look at the facts?

If it would take a lawyer three days to make sure he understood the terms in the form, how did the jury not need the time to do the same? There were 700 questions, remember, and one thing is plain, that the jury didn't take the time to avoid inconsistencies, one of which resulted in the jury casually throwing numbers around, like $2 million dollars for a nonfringement.

So many great quotes from this article.

How did the Galaxy Tab escape design patent infringement? This was the only device to be preliminarily enjoined (on appeal no less), and yet it was the one of the few devices to be spared the sledgehammer. And, by the way, it looks an awful lot like an iPad. Yet the Epic 4G, a phone I own (uh oh, Apple’s coming after me) — which has a slide out keyboard, a curved top and bottom, 4 buttons on the bottom, the word Samsung printed across the top, buttons in different places (and I know this because I look in all the wrong places on my wife’s iTouch), a differently shaped speaker, a differently placed camera, etc. — that device infringes the iPhone design patents....

Relatedly, the ability to get a design patent on a user interface implies that design patent law is broken. This, to me, is the Supreme Court issue in this case. We can dicker about the “facts” of point 2, but whether you can stop all people from having square icons in rows of 4 with a dock is something that I thought we settled in Lotus v. Borland 15 years ago. I commend Apple for finding a way around basic UI law, but this type of ruling cannot stand.

So many inconsistencies. Samsung is going to love this.

From the 109 page form....

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.

From the foreman of the jury....

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."

The same instruction is repeated in Final Jury Instruction No. 53, in case they missed it the first time. Did they obey those instructions? Nay, did they even read them? The evidence, judging by the foreman's reported words, point the wrong way.

Update 3: Samsung lawyer John Quinn is quoted by USA Today saying they'll be asking the judge to toss this out and then appeal, if she does not:

Can I go ahead and say the jury members were a bunch of morons who didn't even bother to read their instructions?

[FlameOn]

Originally Posted by Azure

Can I go ahead and say the jury members were a bunch of morons who didn't even bother to read their instructions?

To put it in perspective the amount of work facing these Juror's was astounding, which is why every was so surprised when they came back with a decision so quickly. The juror's had 700 individual questions and a 109 page set of instructions to go through in under two days. Assuming they worked 16 (generous) hours a day, they got through all the questions at a rate of 3/minute. Instructions weren't simple either and some of these would have taken experts hours to go through. You are probably right, they probably just went did the whole TL; DR thing.

[Azure]

Well its already been pointed out that they never read the instructions properly when the foreman said they wanted to punish Samsung and made sure it wasn't just a slap on the wrist.

Its pretty obvious that they winged it. Do the math.

700 questions, 21 hours, 33 questions per 60 min, Gives them a little under 2 min per question. 120 seconds for one question, 9 jury members means each jury member had a 14 rough seconds to come to a conclusion on each question. It also leaves LITTLE room for debate. If they DID debate on certain questions, it cuts down the time per question even more.

My ass they did their job right.

EDIT: Considering they had 109 pages of instructions that were supposed to help them answer the questions, no way they actually even bothered to read it. You simply can't in the time they took.

2nd EDIT: And if you actually consider how much time it takes to actually READ the question, suddenly they are below 10 seconds per jury member per question. Can you get 9 different answers in less than 10 seconds? If you don't bother to give a crap, sure you can.

Mind boggling.

[Anduril]

Also to quote another jury man from the article, they basically tossed out the idea of prior art in the beginning because they wanted to move on more quickly.

With all that, it's pretty clear that this jury is making a farce of it all.

Sent from my GT-I9100M using Xparent Cyan Tapatalk 2

[Azure]

"We didn't whiz through this," said Hogan, a San Jose resident who relied on his own experience patenting inventions. "We took it very seriously."

14 seconds per question isn't whizzing at all.

While there wasn't much doubt in the jury's mind that Samsung copied the iPhone, the panel was less convinced that the Galaxy 10.1 tablet duplicated the iPad. The jury found some infringement, but scant damages for any tablet violations. Hogan said he views the Samsung tablet as "distinctively different" and was surprised to learn after the jury finished its work that U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh took a different position earlier in the case, issuing a preliminary injunction temporarily blocking sales of the device in the United States.

Yeah, cause the similarities aren't obvious at all there.

Hogan described the deliberations in vivid detail, saying the first task was to determine if Apple's patents were valid because of Samsung's arguments they were negated by "prior art" in the industry, essentially technology that existed for features such as touch screens before the introduction of the iPhone. Using his own experience getting a patent, Hogan said he had a revelation on the first night of deliberations while he watched television.

"I was thinking about the patents, and thought, 'If this were my patent, could I defend it?' " Hogan recalled. "Once I answered that question as yes, it changed how I looked at things."

So he made a decision based on his personal experience, and him owning patents, and not on the evidence before him. No wonder they skipped over the prior art.

http://www.mercurynews.com/business/...t-message-that

[MrMastodonFarm]

Holy crap... Azure had every right to be butthurt, what a joke.

[FlameOn]

Originally Posted by Azure

So he made a decision based on his personal experience, and him owning patents, and not on the evidence before him. No wonder they skipped over the prior art.

http://www.mercurynews.com/business/...t-message-that

So basically the guy who is a patent holder took the jurors through the process of how a patent works from his partial view as a patent holder allowing them to skip the court provided and sanctioned instructions and reach a verdict without reading through all the materials.

I'm sorry, aren't there supposed to be guidelines before before this type of stuff is admissible as overriding instruction for use to the greater jury? Don't the court and both sides have vet said explanations beforehand if they are overriding court appointed material? Precedent has always been to throw out cases when court instructions are ignored or violated.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Holy crap... Azure had every right to be butthurt, what a joke.

i wouldn't say that he's taking it personally, i think this decision is bull#### but it's not because i'm an Android fan. if the jury had found Samsung guilty of copying the design of the iphone in their older devices (the original Galaxy S is a fairly blatant ripoff of the iPhone 3G) and awarded some realistic damages, that would have been fine. but to award damages for devices that don't look like an iphone but have rounded corners is ridiculous, or damages because homescreen app icons have beveled edges

this ruling stinks not because Samsung lost, but because of the dangerous precedent it sets. Apple fans shouldn't be smug, because now the gloves are off and they will be hit by Google and all the Android manufacturers as hard as they can. Motorola will be going after Apple for a slew of hardware patents, and if Google can get their notification bar patented that'll be big trouble for iOS. the only good that can come out of all of this is if the absolute ridiculousness of these rulings can start to force a change in how easily patents are awarded and how broad they can be

[Azure]

The notification bar patent is HUGE. If Google is granted the patent, they can sue and SHOULD be able to get Apple to pay billions upon billions in damages.

There are 292 million devices using iOS5.

[Azure]

And the reason this ticks me off is because I think the competition between Samsung & Apple is the reason we're seeing such amazing phones. Our whole world has changed in the past 5 years because of smartphones.

If Apple is able to get rid of the competition because of 'rounded corners' it sets a pretty bad precedent for any other company making smartphones.

Not to mention the stupidity on which the jury acted.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Azure

And the reason this ticks me off is because I think the competition between Samsung & Apple is the reason we're seeing such amazing phones. Our whole world has changed in the past 5 years because of smartphones.

Not sure myself if this is for the best or not. A lot of good for sure but a lot of bad. People are so distracted wether they are driving, working, socializing, etc. It's becoming a problem for employers. We have contract electricians that now spend more time texting than running conduit. If I have to sit behind another woman at a green light that isn't moving because her head is in her lap looking at her phone!!!

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Azure

Not to mention the stupidity on which the jury acted.

Meh you are just butthurt. I like Samsung but wether it be Apple or Sony they have copied a lot of companies best ideas to get where they are now and it's a fine line that gets crossed by a lot of companies. It's not like this will cripple them or anything as it's still business as usual and won't be the last time they are sued.