Apple vs Samsung case jury foreman interview: "evidence spoke overwhelmingly, no question" about decision

Apple vs Samsung case jury foreman interview: "evidence spoke overwhelmingly, no question" about decision
Velvin Hogan is a name you might have never heard, but the 67-year old electrical engineer happened to be the jury foreman at the Apple versus Samsung case, announcing the jury’s staggering decision to virtually accept all of Apple’s patent claims. Now, he’s making the rounds at the media, explaining how the jury came at that decision, clarifying that Apple didn’t have home court advantage and making clear how convinced the jury was.

"Clearly, the evidence, to us, spoke overwhelmingly," Hogan said in an interview for Bloomberg. "There was no question about it."

As one of the few people in the jury with technical background, the elderly engineer became the foreman for a jury consisting of seven man and two women. The jury’s verdict has polarized opinions with one side claiming that what seems like obvious solutions shouldn’t become a subject of an “Apple tax” while others countering with the argument that even the tiniest of elements like the icons have taken a long time to design, and that effort should be protectted. Obviously, the jurors sided with the second argument:

"In this country, intellectual property deserves to be protected," he said. "If any company decides to ignore the stipulations and the rules and get too close that they cross the line and infringe and do it willfully -- they need to understand if they take the risk and get caught, they should have to pay for it."

The jury decided that Samsung should pay Apple $1.05 billion for patent infringement, but the sum could triple if US district judge Lucy Koh agrees with the jury’s claims of Samsung willfully infringing on Apple’s intellectual property.

"She's an interesting personality," Hogan spoke about Judge Koh, obviously referring to her distinct way of conducting the case and frank expression as in when Koh asked Apple lawyers whether they are “smoking crack.”

You can check out the full interview below, it’s an interesting look behind the scenes and into one of the people that seem to be in the core of a decision that could sway the balance in the mobile industry against Android.

source: Bloomberg



40. plethora

Posts: 7; Member since: Aug 24, 2012

Based on the article linked below, Samsung has more than enough to base their appeal on.

33. pegasso

Posts: 285; Member since: Nov 27, 2011

"even the tiniest of elements like the icons have taken a long time to design, and that effort should be protectted." agreed. the only problem is, you shouldn't protect apple, cause apple didn't invent it, they just steal it from any other designs and claim it as their own...

30. MartyK

Posts: 1045; Member since: Apr 11, 2012

I have a couple problem with this guy: 1. he claims the software that was ran on one computer can't run on apple; thus Prior Art do not apply, hello old goat, sofware on Apple will not run on Android, thus no infringment!. 2.He went home and thought about how he can defend this patent. Hello old Goat, it's not your job to defend anyone in a trial. Why was this lady allow to get the intereview, they should let someone with more experience question this dude!!..she didn't ask no hard question. Like, Prior art, do you know what the law says about Prior Art?.

28. iami67

Posts: 334; Member since: Oct 18, 2011

Sadly Apple is to popular of a company to ever have a true trial with out any jurors being biast. This guy is an engineer and knows nothing about electronics. This is what wrong with this world. I would like a pollof how many of the jurors are iphone users and if we could read minds how many of these people were brainwashed by apple before the court even started. Im sure most of them just like the Apple users. Hopefully the jnew iphone 5 is new and innovative then there will be a reason why people like the phone so much.

27. ekia007

Posts: 61; Member since: Feb 27, 2012

No need to mention. must be Apple's paid Jury

25. rusticguy

Posts: 2828; Member since: Aug 11, 2012

Master Patent Trolls: many of these patents are nothing but a means to get more cash out of the pocket of customer since cross liccensing/licenseing fees just adds to cost of product. Now M$ and IBM are desperately trying to convince the court that do not make the deals of licensing with Samsung public . Why? Because then that would expose many nasty things and also as to how mucch M$ is speaking the truth when they say Linux & Android is Violating many M$ patents and then they use that stick to force mobile companies to pay so called "licensing fees"? They know that if details are made public and if LINUX goes around those patents by chaging ocde then all the licensing fees is gone. Who benifits in that case? The CUSTOMER. Why do you think that despite all this mega patent fights surprisngly for Kodak's patents all (Google/Samsung/Apple/M$) are wanting to bid as a Consortium rather than compete with each other and bid? Future is that all these big guns will use PATENTS to disallow any new comer to enter the market. So patent in no way is promoting creativity in fact it is hindering in a big way. In short it's all a big NEXUS which ensures that they earn money and force any new comer out.

23. Aeires unregistered

Not enough evidence shown by Samsung and not enough time to properly cross examine. Appeal process will be much different.

22. ajac09

Posts: 1482; Member since: Sep 30, 2009

public enemy number 1. Lets see how many websites about how much people hate this guy pop up

20. Mitchel

Posts: 228; Member since: May 25, 2012

While i do agree that Samsung should be punished for copying the hardware & icon design of iPhone 3Gs with SGS1 (and Galaxy Ace but it's not included because it is international), Apple's patents like "pinch to zoom" and "double tap to zoom" should be invalidated because there was a prior art which Samsung showed on the trial..

19. mrbtree

Posts: 59; Member since: Feb 22, 2012

yet same cases overseas gave completely different results with apple losing. south korea has placed a ban on the iphone 4/4s and ipads and the samsung galaxy s2 has also been banned by the same court. or apple losing in the uk with their case against samsung tablets. they lost and have to come clean saying that samsung did "NOT" copy. (although its been postponed. it should still happen).

18. tsspro

Posts: 23; Member since: Jan 18, 2010

USA is a great country. It's just a few with big $$$$$$ and they want power and control.

17. ivanko34

Posts: 617; Member since: Sep 04, 2011

This man is frightening Amerikaka justice is more worse than chinese or communist Ugly country Fake liberty

15. tsspro

Posts: 23; Member since: Jan 18, 2010

The problem is apple patent every single shape, color, even smell. That's right Google move to project glasses, and apple already get some patent on that too. Apple has a whole bunch of artist working for them just to patent things they don't even have. Just for suing other company. and the injustice system is fine with that. Apple has money and lots of it.

14. shuaibhere

Posts: 1986; Member since: Jul 07, 2012

If this not a home court advantage what about england,australia, korea etc etc....he is coming to day that U.S is right all others are wrong.....

11. structureman116

Posts: 142; Member since: Sep 14, 2010

Of course the evidence spoke to you overwhelmingly...Samsung wasn't permitted to use all of their evidence! It would be a different story if Samsung had been allowed to call their designers as witnesses and enter their prior art evidence in to play! The appeals should be interesting and I am looking forward to Samsung being vindicated!

8. jove39

Posts: 2153; Member since: Oct 18, 2011

Well I have to agree with jury made a bad move copying iOS & iPhone in they should be personal feeling...Apple's patents are worth pile of s**t...but!!! Now question boggling my mind is - How they decide $1bn penalty? How they people did cross shopping (walked into store for iPhone but walked out with Samsung phone) and caused loss to Apple? Or they just decided $1bn sounds cool...let slap a $1bn bill on samsung's face...sounds cruel.

10. wendygarett unregistered

yea i cant imagine if samsung win... The whole oem will follow apple which will make a brick phone with that creepy icons with that creepy siri... The world will be so dull :(

13. wendygarett unregistered

don't get me wrong... What i mean is this will lead more creativity to defeat apple... Just like michael article... This is actually good news to android because android will make more creative widget to replace that boring icons :) you fandroid should think at positive side

16. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

your argument is a farce. Samsung moved away from its "me too" SGS1 iphone likeness.... over 2 years ago. Each samsung product and each version of TW has been less "iphone like". However, no matter how similar TW may have been to iphone icons, the SGS1 was still an evolution of their prior phone designs. It was not a big change. Android never looked like a copy cat OS, not at android 1.5 and definitely not at android 4.1. Apple is so worried about suing the industry, they haven't realized its not 2010 anymore. No one wants to look like them... thats old and played out, they just want their profit margin

21. bayhuy

Posts: 320; Member since: Jun 23, 2011

Samsung copied. Deal with it. Sent from my "Samsung Billion $".

37. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

"copIED" key word. I have said the SGS1 Vibrant looks quite a bit like a 3gs multiple times. That doesnt mean they are still "copyING". They surpassed iOS and Apple so long ago its not funny. The only one's who havent noticed are apple and apple fans who are still patting themselves on the back for 2007.

39. jimjam unregistered

Definitely that t-mobile galaxy S II caused plenty of damage to the iphone since the iphone runs on t-mobile 3g/4g ... okay submitted to Koh..... no wait ooops better change the verdict I just gave apple $85 million for this one - anonomous jurist

7. ilia1986 unregistered

He actually sounds earnest and reasonable.

9. MeoCao unregistered

This is not about common sense, this is law so he needed to follow letters of the law and not his belief.

6. TheLibertine

Posts: 484; Member since: Jan 15, 2012

Face judgement, copycat.

41. plethora

Posts: 7; Member since: Aug 24, 2012

And that's coming from someone using the Apple logo as their moniker.

3. dawolf

Posts: 23; Member since: Oct 14, 2011

mr foreman u r an idiot!

2. MeoCao unregistered

So he did not need to follow instruction but only acted on his conviction? Then the verdict must be scrapped.


Posts: 1461; Member since: Mar 09, 2010

"In this country, intellectual property deserves to be protected," he said. "If any company decides to ignore the stipulations and the rules and get too close that they cross the line and infringe and do it willfully -- they need to understand if they take the risk and get caught, they should have to pay for it." This statement says it all, in this country intellectual property needs to be protected. He decided to be judge and jury rendering a verdict based on the need to protect American intellectual property. No one can patent a square or a rectangle as intellectual design. Just look at all the televisions that are 50, 55 40, 60 inches. Look at the Nissan 350z and the Porshe design. Both cars are shaped the same, but no one that wants a porshe will buy a 350z. No one wanting an iPhone could be tricked into buying a Samsung phone. Samsung and Apple have different logos and names for one! The GS did look like apple but they should have looked at prior art, and Samsung should have been able to present evidence in court about that phone being made before iPhone launched! Samsung will get a new trial, and hopefully the verdict will be based on the patents, and all of the evidence.

35. ardent1

Posts: 2000; Member since: Apr 16, 2011

> He decided to be judge and jury rendering a verdict based on the need to protect American intellectual property He was summoned (via the jury duty obligation) to serve as a jurist. He's not a judge. Please understand the FACTS. America has strong property rights and he is just reinforcing what makes America great and maintaining America's innovative nature. America currently leads the word in technology innovations such as computers (smartphones), etc.

* Some comments have been hidden, because they don't meet the discussions rules.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit for samples and additional information.
FCC OKs Cingular's purchase of AT&T Wireless