Apple vs. Samsung Jurors Say Verdict Was Well-Considered, Samsung Emails Damning

Illustration for article titled Apple vs. Samsung Jurors Say Verdict Was Well-Considered, Samsung Emails Damning

When the verdict in the Apple vs. Samsung trail came back so fast, despite having so many individual decisions to it, there was plenty of speculation that the jury might not have really cared or been informed. Jurors themselves are saying otherwise.


CNET and Reuters reached out to two of the jurors, both of whom assert the verdict wasn't rushed or made with any sort of vagueness. This was a very deliberate ruling, and they meant to send a message.

Juror Manuel Ilagan told CNET the following, when asked about specific instances of willful infringment:

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. ...We weren't impatient. We wanted to do the right thing, and not skip any evidence. I think we were thorough.


Jury foreman Velvin Hogan told Reuters that it was "absolutely" clear the infringment was on purpose and that they "didn't want to give carte blanche to a company, by any name, to infringe someone else's intellectual property." [CNET and Reuters via Mac Rumors]

Share This Story

Get our newsletter


Eric, this is complete and utter bullshit:

"Collective certainty aside, there's still a very strong argument to be made that the real problem here—or one of them at least—is the patent system itself, and this verdict very well may have made that situation worse. "

I read this all the time and it is never with any context or structured reasoning. Why is the patent system bad? You threw it out there and you aren't the first. The only reasoning I have read by people that support this position boils down to this: "no one should be able to patent software?" Why not? This is how the game is played. You don't like it? What's your alternative to protect software engineers from being "raped" by lazy multinational corporations?