| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |
| Groklaw: Apple vs. Samsung jury verdict "a farce" |
| By Thom Holwerda on 2012-08-25 18:38:31 |
| 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. |
|
| So? |
| By Nelson on 2012-08-25 18:51:07 |
|
The damages have not been awarded yet. Samsung will likely win small victories as the Jury is prone to error in a verdict this complex. Plus, the Judge can overrule the Jury in instances where they did not understand the minutia of the law. The number could be revised slightly downward, and I expect it to..but Samsung as also found to have willfully infringed which opens the door to up to a tripling of damages. |
 - Score: 2 |
| RE: Lies, Lies, Lies |
| By Thom_Holwerda on 2012-08-25 19:23:16 |
| I was referring to people here in the comments and in other articles (e.g. The Verge). |
| - Score: 1 |
| Comment by MOS6510 |
| By MOS6510 on 2012-08-25 19:44:51 |
|
"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? " Easy, a lawyer gets paid by the hour. |
| - Score: 14 |
| RE: Comment by MOS6510 |
| By Thom_Holwerda on 2012-08-25 19:45:38 |
| BURN. |
| - Score: 1 |
| Everybody knows |
| By Moredhas on 2012-08-25 20:35:55 |
| Just answer "A" to every question, and you can be home in time to watch Springer. Even if it's not multiple choice, just write A. |
| - Score: 9 |
| RE[3]: Lies, Lies, Lies |
| By Fergy on 2012-08-25 21:38:27 |
|
> No one has to like the verdict. It wouldn't have been my personal decision, I'd have pushed for as little damages as possible and tried to invalidate both sides. But, like all contests, rise above your own views. Be a man, rather than whining about fairness. We all knew someone would win. If the shoe was on the other foot, you'd be wetting yourself over how right the world now was. Despite the humiliation you must feel after your self righteous bigoted twisting of every news story and all the gashing of teeth, it is a hollow victory for those of us that hated both sides of the coin and would rather have seen neither win. But, we'll be the bigger people and won't rub it in, even though we know you would have not been so kind to us. You could have saved us all a boring read. You meant to say: "Tough shit" |
| - Score: 8 |
| Nationalism ? |
| By zhengiszen on 2012-08-26 00:26:26 |
|
Has it occured to anyone that this decision could be motivated by some sort of nationalism ? Everybody know American image of leading economy and technology has taken some heavy hits this last decade... Lack of confidence in the rules of Capitalism and "free-trade" ? |
| - Score: 8 |
| Interesting |
| By Windows Sucks on 2012-08-26 00:30:26 |
| http://www.macrumors.com/2012/08... |
| - Score: 1 |
| Comment by broken_symlink |
| By broken_symlink on 2012-08-26 00:33:29 |
|
I thought about this some more, and the one good thing that MIGHT come of this, is that maybe Android hardware manufacturers might decide to just use android as is, instead of putting things like Sense, Touchwiz, and Blur (although I guess this last one probably doesn't matter that much anymore) on it. Wouldn't that then shift liability from hardware manufacturers to Google? Google should offer indemnification incentives for companies that use AOSP as is, and in return these companies should put their patents in a pool. That would solve Android fragmentation problems, and could create a single united front against MS, Apple, and anyone else who tries to sue over Android. The only possible problem would be if hardware manufacturers tried to sue each other over Android, such as HTC suing Samsung, but maybe Google could mediate in those cases? |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE: Nationalism ? |
| By saso on 2012-08-26 01:42:13 |
|
> Has it occured to anyone that this decision could be motivated by some sort of nationalism? It has, and most likely is. Apple is constantly in the news lately viewed positively as an innovative American company, while Samsung is this Asian newcomer who is frequently ridiculed as producing knock-off products. The jurors were no doubt aware of this and as a consequence were most likely heavily biased. As evidenced by the latest released comments from the jurors, Samsung was assumed to be guilty practically from day one, thus invalidating one of the core principles of fair justice (impartiality). Though maybe not practical in this case, it would be very interesting to see if jurors had arrived at the same conclusion had none of them been present at the court hearings themselves and instead worked from court transcripts (the information content is the same as what is said in a court room, save for the drama) and the materials identifying the parties had been anonymized (referring rather to parties "A" and "B" rather than "Apple" and "Samsung"). Edited 2012-08-26 01:43 UTC |
| - Score: 10 |
| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |