Reuters and CNet have interviewed members of the Apple / Samsung patent trial jury who awarded Apple over $1 billion in damages over patent infringement claims against Samsung.
Reuters spoke with jury foreman Velvin Hogan who explained that they found Apple's arguments persuasive about the need to protect innovation. Furthermore, Hogan says it was "absolutely" clear based on Samsung executive testimony that the infringement was purposeful.
In the CNet interview with another Apple v. Samsung juror, Manuel Ilagan reiterated that it was "clear there was infringement". When asked for specifics, he said:
"Well, there were several. The e-mails that went back and forth from Samsung execs about the Apple features that they should incorporate into their devices was pretty damning to me. And also, on the last day, they showed the pictures of the phones that Samsung made before the iPhone came out and ones that they made after the iPhone came out. Some of the Samsung executives they presented on video [testimony] from Korea -- I thought they were dodging the questions. They didn't answer one of them. They didn't help their cause."
Both jurors claim that their decision was deliberate and not rushed. According to Ilagan, the process was helped by the experience within the jury pool. Hogan, the jury foreman, had previously worked as an engineer and holds a patent himself. Meanwhile, others on the jury were said to also have engineering and legal experience.
In determining the award amount, Hogan reports that they felt Apple's demands of $2.75 billion was "extraordinarily high", especially taking into account the uncertainty in Apple's ability to have sold significantly more iPhones due to component supply constraints. That said, Hogan told Reuters they did want a send a message.
"We didn't want to give carte blanche to a company, by any name, to infringe someone else's intellectual property," Hogan told Reuters a day after the verdict.
This is a sad day. And I say this as an Apple fan.
I love their products, but they seem to be turning into bigger and bigger control freaks as time goes on. I'm worried about Apple becoming *too successful*, because if they do they are likely to engage in monopolistic practices, which still stifle innovation and give people little choice in platform.
Apple really needs to learn to play well with others.
I still don't understand how stopping Samsung from coping Apple is stifling innovation...
I think they made the right decision. Samsung clearly copied and infringed on Apple's patents, Apple told them to stop many times, offered to licence it to them but Samsung still refused to cooperate so Apple sued them. Serves them right.
This is a sad day. And I say this as an Apple fan.
I love their products, but they seem to be turning into bigger and bigger control freaks as time goes on. I'm worried about Apple becoming *too successful*, because if they do they are likely to engage in monopolistic practices, which still stifle innovation and give people little choice in platform.
Apple really needs to learn to play well with others.
What this jury verdict says is that Apple has the right to protect their intellectual property and that Samsung is guilty of lifting Apple's innovation despite the fact that Apple had offered Samsung several times to license their property.
I will also point out that Samsung is the worldwide leader in unit marketshare of smartphones.
Samsung dominates the market by selling lots of devices that -- according to this jury -- are crammed full of Apple intellectual property. Apple has a long way to go to reach what would be a monopoly.
You should understand that the jury members are interpreting US patent law and aren't employees of Apple Inc. nor Samsung. As a matter of fact, any Apple or Samsung employees would have been weeded out during the jury selection process.
The jury is not telling anyone to stop innovating. They are telling Samsung to do their own innovation and not to steal stuff from Apple and saying it is theirs. Due to the lack of congressional foresight, current patent law has no actionable provision for "finders keepers, losers weepers" or "share your toys with the other kids in the sandbox."
Now, if you think the US patent system is broken, that's an entirely different (and arguably valid) discussion, however the jury is instructed to base their verdict on existing and active law.
These laws weren't written to favor one specific company (like Apple, Coca-Cola, Microsoft, Wonderbra, whoever).
You have understood nothing about this entire legal action.
Manuel Ilagan, that is NOT evidence in regards to what you were supposed to decided on.:rolleyes:
Apparently Coca-Cola should sue Pepsi for Sierra Mist because they decided they want a lemon-lime soda like Sprite.
Uh, the jury needs to consider all the evidence presented at trial. It's a little strange that you feel you can redefine the rules of evidence used at trial in an internet forum.
Manuel Ilagan, that is NOT evidence in regards to what you were supposed to decided on.:rolleyes:
Apparently Coca-Cola should sue Pepsi for Sierra Mist because they decided they want a lemon-lime soda like Sprite.
And they would definitely sue Pepsi if they copied.
----------
This is a sad day. And I say this as an Apple fan.
I love their products, but they seem to be turning into bigger and bigger control freaks as time goes on. I'm worried about Apple becoming *too successful*, because if they do they are likely to engage in monopolistic practices, which still stifle innovation and give people little choice in platform.
Apple really needs to learn to play well with others.
Samsung is the one that needs to learn to play well with others - this has been going on for years and years with them.
Apple has announced it will be holding a special event on Tuesday, May 7 at 7 a.m. Pacific Time (10 a.m. Eastern Time), with a live stream to be available on Apple.com and on YouTube as usual. The event invitation has a tagline of "Let Loose" and shows an artistic render of an Apple Pencil, suggesting that iPads will be a focus of the event. Subscribe to the MacRumors YouTube channel for more ...
Apple has dropped the number of Vision Pro units that it plans to ship in 2024, going from an expected 700 to 800k units to just 400k to 450k units, according to Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo. Orders have been scaled back before the Vision Pro has launched in markets outside of the United States, which Kuo says is a sign that demand in the U.S. has "fallen sharply beyond expectations." As a...
Apple is finally planning a Calculator app for the iPad, over 14 years after launching the device, according to a source familiar with the matter. iPadOS 18 will include a built-in Calculator app for all iPad models that are compatible with the software update, which is expected to be unveiled during the opening keynote of Apple's annual developers conference WWDC on June 10. AppleInsider...
The upcoming iOS 17.5 update for the iPhone includes only a few new user-facing features, but hidden code changes reveal some additional possibilities. Below, we have recapped everything new in the iOS 17.5 and iPadOS 17.5 beta so far. Web Distribution Starting with the second beta of iOS 17.5, eligible developers are able to distribute their iOS apps to iPhone users located in the EU...
Wednesday April 24, 2024 3:39 pm PDT by Juli Clover
Apple today released several open source large language models (LLMs) that are designed to run on-device rather than through cloud servers. Called OpenELM (Open-source Efficient Language Models), the LLMs are available on the Hugging Face Hub, a community for sharing AI code. As outlined in a white paper [PDF], there are eight total OpenELM models, four of which were pre-trained using the...
Apple has stopped production of FineWoven accessories, according to the Apple leaker and prototype collector known as "Kosutami." In a post on X (formerly Twitter), Kosutami explained that Apple has stopped production of FineWoven accessories due to its poor durability. The company may move to another non-leather material for its premium accessories in the future. Kosutami has revealed...
Top Rated Comments
I still don't understand how stopping Samsung from coping Apple is stifling innovation...
I will also point out that Samsung is the worldwide leader in unit marketshare of smartphones.
https://www.macrumors.com/2012/07/27/apples-share-of-worldwide-smartphone-market-slides-as-samsung-continues-to-surge/
Samsung dominates the market by selling lots of devices that -- according to this jury -- are crammed full of Apple intellectual property. Apple has a long way to go to reach what would be a monopoly.
You should understand that the jury members are interpreting US patent law and aren't employees of Apple Inc. nor Samsung. As a matter of fact, any Apple or Samsung employees would have been weeded out during the jury selection process.
The jury is not telling anyone to stop innovating. They are telling Samsung to do their own innovation and not to steal stuff from Apple and saying it is theirs. Due to the lack of congressional foresight, current patent law has no actionable provision for "finders keepers, losers weepers" or "share your toys with the other kids in the sandbox."
Now, if you think the US patent system is broken, that's an entirely different (and arguably valid) discussion, however the jury is instructed to base their verdict on existing and active law.
These laws weren't written to favor one specific company (like Apple, Coca-Cola, Microsoft, Wonderbra, whoever).
You have understood nothing about this entire legal action.
Uh, the jury needs to consider all the evidence presented at trial. It's a little strange that you feel you can redefine the rules of evidence used at trial in an internet forum.
And they would definitely sue Pepsi if they copied.
----------
Samsung is the one that needs to learn to play well with others - this has been going on for years and years with them.