Juror in Apple v. Samsung patent trial says it was Apple from day one of deliberations
0. phoneArena 25 Aug 2012, 14:39 posted on
Manuel Ilagan, one of the nine jurors whose verdict in favor of Apple has shaken up the Android community, had a few words to say to the media on Saturday; Ilagan disclosed that the jury had some heated arguments before coming to a decision...
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
36. kingpet13 (Posts: 139; Member since: 02 Feb 2012)
This is obviously a flawed jury. The jury is supposed to listen to all arguments and then decide. It also decision is made after hearing only one argument, the juror will naturally believe that that argument is right for the rest of a trial. They will listen to the other arguments, but most likely create reasons not to believe it.
For example if I say that android is better because of superior specs, any ifan will claim that more powerful processing is useless even though my statement is obviously true.
And if I say that ios is better because of its simplicity and optimization of the hardware, any android fanboy will argue that project butter fixes this.
After someone gets an opinion than they will declare anything that challenges that opinion wrong. So to make a decision Without hearing any of Samsungs argument is going to cause them to disagree with anything Samsung says. So essentially whoever presents evidence first was guaranteed victory in this case.
This case has to much iBiAs for me.
37. roscuthiii (Posts: 1787; Member since: 18 Jul 2010)
So... one juror was a patent holder? Hmm, gee, you'd think that would make him more sympathetic to any plaintiff in a patent infringement case. I wouldn't have let that one slip through jury selection if I'd been Samsung. Unless they didn't know. And, I see we also have an AT&T employee, a company with a strong relationship with Apple, and he's the one that helped calculate the damages. Very interesting...
38. bomariam1 (Posts: 30; Member since: 08 May 2012)
This is it. Samsung stop selling in the ugly USA.
Its all political. Justice they say.
40. dragonscourgex (Posts: 307; Member since: 16 Jan 2012)
This jury should just hang they heads in shame. I don't think they know what this is going cause. The rewarded Apple a billion dollars cause both company had rectangle with rounded corners. This like a tv making claiming they own the trade dress of a rectangle for tv, or a car/truck maker saying the own the general shape of the a car/truck. All these product have a general similar shape and feel, but it the slight details that set them apart from each other. I feel this jury of nine should be locked in to haveing to serve on every lawsuit apple is going bring up . After about the 5th to 6th 3 week+ period of their lives they have to waste, listening to apple claim how they invented radius on a rectangle, they might finally open their eyes and realize how stupid their first verdict was.
42. MartyK (Posts: 705; Member since: 11 Apr 2012)
"In fact we skipped that one," Ilagan continued, "so we could go on faster. It was bogging us down."
We weren't impatient," Ilagan said. "We wanted to do the right thing, and not skip any evidence. I think we were thorough."
The deliberation process moved faster once all the jury members had agreed that Apple's patents were infringed.
It would be easiers to say, " We screw Samsung".
45. remixfa (Posts: 13903; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
"Ilagan said that the jury felt from day one of deliberations that Samsung had "harmed" Apple."
dont forget that opening bit. That means before any real evidence was actually presented by either side the jury was already siding with apple.
Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaa impartial, huh?
Good, let this fool keep talking, he's only helping samsung's appeal.
47. remixfa (Posts: 13903; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
"once you determine Samsung violated the trade dress, the flatscreen with the Bezel...then you go down the products to see if it had a bezel."
so according to this statement, any phone that has a flat screen and bezel is liable to apple... you know. .because they invented screens and bezels..
What a bunch morons....
48. roscuthiii (Posts: 1787; Member since: 18 Jul 2010)
Reminds me of what I said about a handful of people not smart enough to get out of jury duty...
53. remixfa (Posts: 13903; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
it does completely.
Sadly, you have 3 people with mobile/tech/patent experience of some sort in there, and they were still biased from the start.
49. rusticguy (Posts: 2826; Member since: 11 Aug 2012)
Reminds me of that so called research (biggest scam on earth) by Ancel Keys wrt Fat and Cholestrol where the conclusions were drawn before the research staretd and then data of countries which did not fit the analysis (statistical??) was excluded and this gavce birth to the fashion of writing STATIN Drugs for cholestrol control which after pharma companies made billions for years later was found that it causes more damage then good and was one of most over prescribed drug to increase personal profist of few ....
It only happens in America :)
55. roscuthiii (Posts: 1787; Member since: 18 Jul 2010)
Yep, "Big Money" runs the good ol' US and one of these two litigants has more of it than just about anybody. Any wonder which one of them won?
Especially right now when they're using Apple has America's Cinderella story? Two creative guys starting in their garage and forming the most valuable company of all time... It's all a fluff piece to give the downtrodden, the forsaken, and the hapless hope that they too can achieve the American Dream if they just work hard. Regardless of the current economy saying different.
Apple went right from 1984 into Animal Farm:
"...Some of us are created more equal than others."
63. willard12 (Posts: 761; Member since: 04 Jul 2012)
In all fairness, deliberations begin after closing arguments and evidence is presented. But, the disclosure that Apple's before and after pictures were a deciding factor makes the appeal process easier. The Apple picture, that conveniently left out the f700 is grounds for reversal. Thanks Judge Koh for that ruling.
50. techguy22 (Posts: 226; Member since: 09 Aug 2012)
so why they spent 2 weeks in court for ????
seriously we all knew apple was going to win. because the jury weren't biased. yeah
51. Evil_SaNz (Posts: 258; Member since: 20 Oct 2011)
Excuse me: what about Samsung F700 before iPhone release? Big central button, rectangular, round edges?
56. roscuthiii (Posts: 1787; Member since: 18 Jul 2010)
Oh, the paperwork for that wasn't submitted until after the discovery period so it wasn't allowed... And yet even after they rested their cases, yes, that's rested their cases, Apple was allowed to hunt down a photo of and apply spin to the Fidler tablet to present to the jurors while they were (briefly) in deliberations.
68. Peter98 (Posts: 119; Member since: 01 Aug 2012)
This is true. Apple done it very well in this case.
72. bantheiphonedotcom (banned) (Posts: 28; Member since: 24 Aug 2012)
' Ilagan said that the jury felt from day one of deliberations that Samsung had "harmed" Apple'
Samsung will have basis to dismiss this now - I mean a jury member or members already deciding 'in their minds' that Samsung was guilty....wow, Samsung had no chance - competent lawyers or not.
78. sometimes (Posts: 1; Member since: 26 Aug 2012)
"Ilagan said that the jury felt from day one of deliberations that Samsung had "harmed" Apple."
I don't see the problem with that. What's the alternative...
"llagan said that the jury listened to the entire first day of testimony and walked away with absolutely no feeling whatsoever."
So, were they even listening? Of course they felt something. They listened to the testimony. They weighed the statements made and evidence presented so far, and... *gasp*... felt something.
Sounds as if most of the posters here are the ones walking into the situation with a bias.
79. VZWuser76 (Posts: 1337; Member since: 04 Mar 2010)
I think the point of this is that they already had assigned blame to Samsung before Samsung had even had a chance to defend themselves. If you've already got your mind made up before hearing both sides, when the second side is presented there's already bias against it.
The statement that really gauls me is about how one of the points of contention was really bogging them down, so they skipped it. But then he says they were very thorough. Ignoring evidence is grounds for an appeal, if not a reversal of the decision. It's like saying a jury was bogged down by if the murder weapon had been planted or not, so they just skipped it. In that case that's the difference between life or death.
The point of a jury being impartial is so that justice is carried out. While I understand that people cannot be 100% impartial, they should at least wait until both sides are presented before making up their minds. That's where the phrase "reserve judgement" comes from. If your a spectator it's different because your opinion has no bearing on the case. But if you are charged with finding justice, whether for the plaintiff or defendant, it's your duty wait until both sides are presented, weigh the evidence, and come to a judgement. Anything else and all that has been done is waste time & money.
82. Forsaken77 (Posts: 547; Member since: 09 Jun 2011)
I don't know why you guys are saying it's all bias. Samsung blatantly copied Apple, period... end of story. Their frigin ports on the devices were the exact same shape and size, the accessories looked exactly alike. Samsung tried to confuse the public by making their products look identical, in most cases, to Apples' products. Take off your fanboy goggles and see it for what it is. I love my Galaxy phones, but Samsung got caught red handed. You sound like fools saying the court is bias. I mean even Samsung executives were discussing what Apple features to put in their phones. What more do you need? There's no defending that. Samsung screwed up, now they gotta pay up.
Now the GS3 is a different story. That phone has alot of features that surpass the iPhone technology.