Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 25th Aug 2012 18:38 UTC
Legal Well, that didn't take long. Groklaw notes several interesting inconsistencies and other issues with the jury verdict. "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. Come on. This is farce." My favourite inconsistency: a Samsung phone with a keyboard, four buttons, and a large Samsung logo on top infringes the iPhone design patent. And yet, we were told (in the comments, on other sites) that the Samsung f700 was not prior art... Because it had a keyboard. I smell fish.
E-mail Print r 10   42 Comment(s)
Thread beginning with comment 532385
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Only Value for Apple is PR
by Lorin on Sun 26th Aug 2012 11:34 UTC
Member since:

Based on prior Supreme Court rulings, this will be struck down and Samsung will with certainty go all the way and nothing will ever be paid out to Apple, most likely it will be Apple paying out to all of the companies that were inventing these things long before Apple decided to "borrow".

Reply Score: 3

RE: Only Value for Apple is PR
by viton on Sun 26th Aug 2012 15:48 in reply to "Only Value for Apple is PR"
viton Member since:

Apple "PR" turned out against them.

So this stupid trial is a huge Samsung Ad-campaign sponsored by Samsung =)

Edited 2012-08-26 15:49 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4