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.
Thread beginning with comment 533925
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Incompetent, but ...
by kwan_e on Wed 5th Sep 2012 11:19 UTC in reply to "Incompetent, but ..."
Member since:

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.

I'd rather verdicts being discarded by jury incompetence than by plaintiff or defendant's pocket depth.

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?

If the foreman made similar decisions, I wouldn't oppose a re-trial. Actually, I think the people against software and design patents in general would prefer no lawsuits based on patents at all, no matter who fired first.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Incompetent, but ...
by rinzai on Wed 5th Sep 2012 11:31 in reply to "RE: Incompetent, but ..."
rinzai Member since:

Yes, I agree.

The best scenario would have been no trial at all.

I am far from being an expert in this field (possibly even worst than the foreman!) but something that always intrigued me is how Apple, Inc. takes a de-facto, successful design (ie. laptop design: rectangular foldable computer with screen and keyboard separated) and has no problem with it!

They didn't "invent" the laptop but are quite happy at selling their own.

Please correct me if I'm seeing this from the wrong angle...

Edited 2012-09-05 11:32 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: Incompetent, but ...
by WereCatf on Wed 5th Sep 2012 11:34 in reply to "RE[2]: Incompetent, but ..."
WereCatf Member since:

You should have already realized that it is copying only when someone does the same thing as Apple does, not vice versa.

Reply Parent Score: 9