Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 5th Sep 2012 10:43 UTC
Legal "This is in the believe it or not category, but the foreman in the Apple v Samsung trial is still talking about the verdict and why the jurors did what they did. And the more he talks, the worse it gets for that verdict. Gizmodo asked him to sit today for live questions. And believe it or not, he did it. And when asked if the jury was ever asking whether or not a patent should have issued, he claims that they never did because that wasn't their role and the judge told them to assume the patents issued properly and not to second guess that determination. That is so wrong it's not even just wrong. The verdict form and the jury instructions specifically asked them to address that very question." Together with the earlier reports, it's quite clear by now this jury messed up completely. If a device with a keyboard can be found to infringe iPhone design patents, then everything can. This verdict should be flushed down the crapper.
Permalink for comment 533922
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Incompetent, but ...
by rinzai on Wed 5th Sep 2012 11:06 UTC
rinzai
Member since:
2011-05-11

As many other people, I was very disappointed with this verdict and I see that the foreman clearly does not have an understanding of the issues at hand.

My problem is that turning trials based on jury's "competence" is, to me, a very very *very* slippery slope.

I opens the doors to any verdict being discarded by whoever disagrees with it.

That's one of the flaws of the jury system, IMO.

Not flaming or defending any of the sides that went to court, but genuinely curious:

If the verdict was in favour of Samsung, would all the voices against the foreman still be calling for a re-trial due to jury's not being fit for purpose?

Reply Score: 4