Jury Members Discuss Thought Process Behind Apple vs. Samsung Verdict

damages
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.

Popular Stories

iPhone 16 Pro Sizes Feature

iPhone 16 Series Is Just Two Months Away: Everything We Know

Monday July 15, 2024 4:44 am PDT by
Apple typically releases its new iPhone series around mid-September, which means we are about two months out from the launch of the iPhone 16. Like the iPhone 15 series, this year's lineup is expected to stick with four models – iPhone 16, iPhone 16 Plus, iPhone 16 Pro, and iPhone 16 Pro Max – although there are plenty of design differences and new features to take into account. To bring ...
iPhone SE 4 Vertical Camera Feature

iPhone SE 4 Rumored to Use Same Rear Chassis as iPhone 16

Friday July 19, 2024 7:16 am PDT by
Apple will adopt the same rear chassis manufacturing process for the iPhone SE 4 that it is using for the upcoming standard iPhone 16, claims a new rumor coming out of China. According to the Weibo-based leaker "Fixed Focus Digital," the backplate manufacturing process for the iPhone SE 4 is "exactly the same" as the standard model in Apple's upcoming iPhone 16 lineup, which is expected to...
New MacBook Pros Launching Tomorrow With These 4 New Features 2

M5 MacBook Models to Use New Compact Camera Module in 2025

Wednesday July 17, 2024 2:58 am PDT by
Apple in 2025 will take on a new compact camera module (CCM) supplier for future MacBook models powered by its next-generation M5 chip, according to Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo. Writing in his latest investor note on unny-opticals-2025-business-momentum-to-benefit-509819818c2a">Medium, Kuo said Apple will turn to Sunny Optical for the CCM in its M5 MacBooks. The Chinese optical lens company...
tinypod apple watch

TinyPod Turns Your Apple Watch Into an iPod

Wednesday July 17, 2024 3:18 pm PDT by
If you have an old Apple Watch and you're not sure what to do with it, a new product called TinyPod might be the answer. Priced at $79, the TinyPod is a silicone case with a built-in scroll wheel that houses the Apple Watch chassis. When an Apple Watch is placed inside the TinyPod, the click wheel on the case is able to be used to scroll through the Apple Watch interface. The feature works...
iphone 14 lineup

Cellebrite Unable to Unlock iPhones on iOS 17.4 or Later, Leak Reveals

Thursday July 18, 2024 4:18 am PDT by
Israel-based mobile forensics company Cellebrite is unable to unlock iPhones running iOS 17.4 or later, according to leaked documents verified by 404 Media. The documents provide a rare glimpse into the capabilities of the company's mobile forensics tools and highlight the ongoing security improvements in Apple's latest devices. The leaked "Cellebrite iOS Support Matrix" obtained by 404 Media...
Apple Watch Series 9

2024 Apple Watch Lineup: Key Changes We're Expecting

Tuesday July 16, 2024 7:59 am PDT by
Apple is seemingly planning a rework of the Apple Watch lineup for 2024, according to a range of reports from over the past year. Here's everything we know so far. Apple is expected to continue to offer three different Apple Watch models in five casing sizes, but the various display sizes will allegedly grow by up to 12% and the casings will get taller. Based on all of the latest rumors,...

Top Rated Comments

spazzcat Avatar
155 months ago
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...
Score: 124 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Mavrack Avatar
155 months ago
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.
Score: 94 Votes (Like | Disagree)
cvaldes Avatar
155 months ago
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.

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.
Score: 93 Votes (Like | Disagree)
spacehog371 Avatar
155 months ago
This well thought out explanation is going to frustrate critics who want to blame an ignorant jury for what happened.
Score: 69 Votes (Like | Disagree)
iSee Avatar
155 months ago
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.
Score: 48 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Iconoclysm Avatar
155 months ago
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.
Score: 42 Votes (Like | Disagree)