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.
Apple may have canceled the super scratch resistant anti-reflective display coating that it planned to use for the iPhone 17 Pro models, according to a source with reliable information that spoke to MacRumors.
Last spring, Weibo leaker Instant Digital suggested Apple was working on a new anti-reflective display layer that was more scratch resistant than the Ceramic Shield. We haven't heard...
Apple has completed Engineering Validation Testing (EVT) for at least one iPhone 17 model, according to a paywalled preview of an upcoming DigiTimes report.
iPhone 17 Air mockup based on rumored design
The EVT stage involves Apple testing iPhone 17 prototypes to ensure the hardware works as expected. There are still DVT (Design Validation Test) and PVT (Production Validation Test) stages to...
Wednesday April 30, 2025 3:59 am PDT by Tim Hardwick
Apple is preparing to launch a dramatically thinner iPhone this September, and if recent leaks are anything to go by, the so-called iPhone 17 Air could boast one of the most radical design shifts in recent years.
iPhone 17 Air dummy model alongside iPhone 16 Pro (credit: AppleTrack)
At just 5.5mm thick (excluding a slightly raised camera bump), the 6.6-inch iPhone 17 Air is expected to become ...
Apple will likely manufacture its 20th anniversary iPhone models in China, despite broader efforts to shift production to India, according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman.
In 2027, Apple is planning a "major shake-up" for the iPhone lineup to mark two decades since the original model launched. Gurman's previous reporting indicates the company will introduce a foldable iPhone alongside a "bold"...
This week marks the 10th anniversary of the Apple Watch, which launched on April 24, 2015. Yesterday, we recapped features rumored for the Apple Watch Series 11, but since 2015, the Apple Watch has also branched out into the Apple Watch Ultra and the Apple Watch SE, so we thought we'd take a look at what's next for those product lines, too.
2025 Apple Watch Ultra 3
Apple didn't update the...
Tuesday April 29, 2025 1:30 am PDT by Tim Hardwick
Despite being more than two years old, Apple's AirPods Pro 2 still dominate the premium wireless‑earbud space, thanks to a potent mix of top‑tier audio, class‑leading noise cancellation, and Apple's habit of delivering major new features through software updates. With AirPods Pro 3 widely expected to arrive in 2025, prospective buyers now face a familiar dilemma: snap up the proven...
Wednesday April 23, 2025 8:31 am PDT by Joe Rossignol
While the iPhone 17 Pro and iPhone 17 Pro Max are not expected to launch until September, there are already plenty of rumors about the devices.
Below, we recap key changes rumored for the iPhone 17 Pro models as of April 2025:
Aluminum frame: iPhone 17 Pro models are rumored to have an aluminum frame, whereas the iPhone 15 Pro and iPhone 16 Pro models have a titanium frame, and the iPhone ...
Tuesday April 29, 2025 3:36 am PDT by Tim Hardwick
All upcoming iPhone 17 models will come equipped with 12GB of RAM to support Apple Intelligence, according to the Weibo-based leaker Digital Chat Station.
The claim from the Chinese leaker, who has sources within Apple's supply chain, comes a few days after industry analyst Ming-Chi Kuo said that the iPhone 17 Air, iPhone 17 Pro, and iPhone 17 Pro Max will all be equipped with 12GB of RAM.
...
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.
