Jury deliberations underway in Apple v. Samsung trial

Jury deliberations underway in Apple v. Samsung trial
The jury in the Apple v. Samsung patent trial has begun deliberations after listening to 3 weeks of testimony. The 7 men and 2 women are charged with tryng to decide whether Apple proved "by a preponderance of the evidence" that Samsung violated the Cupertino based firm's patents. The 9 also have to make a decision on Samsung's counter-claim, if Samsung was able to show that Apple infringed upon the Korean based firm's patents.

During closing arguments on Tuesday, Apple's chief attorney Harold McElhinny said that after the launch of the Apple iPhone, Samsung was having a "crisis of design" and illegally copied the device to cash in on its success. Samsung said it was merely giving consumers what they wanted, smartphones with big screens. Samsung says that not only did they not infringe on Apple's patents, but those patents were really developed by other companies.

Judge Lucy Koh read 109 pages of instructions to the jury in a reading that took 2 hours to complete. Now, the jury will have to go through a 20 page form and check off its decision on each claim. Even professionals in the business are astounded with the complexity involved. You would think that Karen Lisko, who runs a jury consulting company specializing in patent trials, would be used to the form handed to the jury to mark off. But Lisko said, "The verdict form is crazy. It's incredibly complicated." But this case has been complicated from the start with both sides trying to grab a little edge. Attorneys for both sides have been marking down points of contention that might be used in a future appeal.

Besides the hefty jury verdict forms, in the jury room is a number of smartphones and tablets for the jury to use during deliberations. As we told you on Tuesday, Judge Koh has ordered the members of the jury to refrain from inserting a SIM card in the models. Nor are they allowed to update any device or load apps on them as the idea is to keep their appearance the same so the jury can determine if patents were infringed upon.

Considering what is at stake, experts expect the jury to take some time to get the verdict right.

source: AP



1. theBankRobber

Posts: 682; Member since: Sep 22, 2011

If Samsung wins, this will help slow down other Apple lawsuits. If Apple wins, this will increase lawsuits and use the same tactics against others. Its ether a huge gain or huge loss.

3. jael206

Posts: 147; Member since: Jul 18, 2012

if apple wins, google/moto will enter the patent lawsuit scene.. no gain for apple there

9. aikonix

Posts: 60; Member since: Apr 08, 2012

google/moto is already filing regardless of apples win/loss....

28. anywherehome

Posts: 971; Member since: Dec 13, 2011

yes, Apple must be punished for being against phones evolution and trying monopolize phone market with "rectangle" patents Apple=pure evil Steve Jobs=drugs, lying, desire for power (FBI files=facts) why any one could trust Apple???

2. ncv144

Posts: 126; Member since: May 04, 2012

Let the Games Begin!

4. parkwaydr

Posts: 572; Member since: Sep 07, 2011

well hopefully the jury members have some common sense and see that galaxy sales have not hurt apple in any way shape or form.

6. Aeires unregistered

Hopefully the jury has common sense and knows you can't patent a rectangle and the color black.

10. frydaexiii

Posts: 1476; Member since: Dec 01, 2011

The thing is, it has hurt iPhone sales, but not because it's a copy, the Galaxy S3 is just simply better in every aspect except build material (Well, glass isn't exactly sturdy either, but like people say, at least it gives you a premium feel).

29. s.mrabet

Posts: 147; Member since: Oct 26, 2011

A house built of glass gives a premium feel, but a phone made out of glass ( back & front) is just stupid!

32. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

i will never understand people that think glass and aluminum are "premium" materials. They are super cheap, super common, and in the case of glass, super fragile. A lack of understanding about the materials involved creates a misconception of premium. If you want premium, go look at one of those awful Vertu phones. They are "premium" all over... and ugly as heck for it.

17. phitch

Posts: 214; Member since: Mar 06, 2012

Hopefully the Jury realizes that by the time the Galaxy S came out the iPhone had 4 models and was already the most well established smart phone on the market. That the people who purchased a Galaxy did so because they wanted it, not because they thought a product without the circular home button and with a big branded logo reading "SAMSUNG" was somehow an APPLE Product. Also I hope they realize that Apple is comparing the first iPhone to the Galaxy S and claiming they lost money. It is silly because it assumes that everyone who purchased a Galaxy had the option to purchase an iPhone (iPhone was locked to AT&T in the US only). That these people who hang on every word from Steve Jobs somehow couldn't tell the latest version of the iPhone from the Galaxy S or the original. That the Galaxy S was stealing money from Apple based on the idea that it looked like the original iPhone (Which again... black and rectangle) and not the new iPhone. I am pretty sure by the time the Galaxy was released anyone who was going to buy the, by then, 3 year old model of the iPhone had done so. Here are some interesting phone designs: http://www.telefonvarmi.com/resimler/orjinal/nec_n940.jpghttp://www.xinhuanet.com/classad/shouji/xinsrc_39212011215182722399846.jpg Both of the above are from 2004! http://www.welectronics.com/gsm/Eten/eten-x500+-black.jpg Is from 2006! http://icons.iconarchive.com/icons/pierocksmysocks/mobile-device/256/Gigabyte-GSmart-i128-icon.png 2005! http://images03.olx.com.pk/ui/3/92/86/62268686_1-iMate-JAMin-Pocket-PC-for-Sale-with-2-Gb-Card-All-Accesaries-.jpg 2006! Look a row of colorful icons in a 4x4 grid... opps! The point of those pictures is to show that cell phone designers were working with a natural evolution of the cell phone when they began to design it, that you can't point to one product and claim "this was the start of it all" but you can look at how cell phones started to trade buttons on the phone for ones on screen and how the shape trended towards rectangular with a centered screen.

23. tedkord

Posts: 17418; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

Exactly. I bought an Android, not because it was similar to an iPhone, but because it's the anti iPhone. I don't want locked down. I don't want Steve Jobs deciding what I can or cannot do with the device I paid for. I don't want to be fed minor updates every 18 months, or to wait years to get the tech others have. I'm not anti iPhone. I think it did bring the smartphone to the masses, brought it to the forefront of tech. I still think it's a great device, perfect for many. Lacking for others. I am anti Apple, however. Simply because of these patent games they're playing. I've said it before, but it bears repeating. Apple has seen all this happen before, with PC's. They know, from experience, that many OEMs working on a more open product will easily outpace them in innovation, and market share. They cannot keep up, no one could. They tried the same shenanigans back then to stifle innovation and litigate away competition, but back then we had saner ip laws, and you couldn't patent software, only copyright the code. And they were smacked down. And they're scared to death that history will repeat itself.

5. Sniggly

Posts: 7305; Member since: Dec 05, 2009

The only worry I have is over the danger of precedent. If Apple wins this it gives them free reign to really chomp down on the other manufacturers.

8. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

yup. thats my big worry as well. precedent can be a very dangerous thing if its used wrong.

13. MartyK

Posts: 1043; Member since: Apr 11, 2012

I don't thing Samsung is worry, they have so many grounds for appeal, this Judge was bias from jump street.

7. huypaulha94

Posts: 24; Member since: Jun 21, 2012

May the odds be ever in your favor! :D

11. taco50

Posts: 5506; Member since: Oct 08, 2009

This is a huge case. Like others have said it will set the tone. Hopefully the jury makes the righ decision.

12. Sniggly

Posts: 7305; Member since: Dec 05, 2009

Oh hey. You're back. Welcome back.

20. joey_sfb

Posts: 6794; Member since: Mar 29, 2012

Welcome back! And your comment is neutral for once.

22. frydaexiii

Posts: 1476; Member since: Dec 01, 2011

Yeah, when he says "Hopefully the jury makes the righ decision", he probably means "Yup, Apple's totally gonna win."

15. tedkord

Posts: 17418; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

What's going to hurt Apple here is the actual devices in the deliberation chamber. Jurors are going to pick up a Samsung device, unlock it and see the home screen, not the app drawer. Then, they're going to say, "This looks nothing like Apple's evidence pictures." I've got a feeling justice is going to be served, and Apple are going to have a number of their specious patents invalidated. A jury full of people with common sense spells trouble for Apple.

25. taco50

Posts: 5506; Member since: Oct 08, 2009

You're nuts the original galaxy phone is a total iPhone clone

26. Sniggly

Posts: 7305; Member since: Dec 05, 2009

The original Galaxy S (international and T-Mobile/Verizon) variants were pretty iPhone esque. The Epic 4G wasn't so much, and the Captivate was very different hardware wise. The ONLY resemblance the Galaxy S series had after that was the middle home button on the international version. And THEN, the ONLY major software "ripoff" one could claim the Galaxy S 3 has is S Voice, which has actually been shown to work as well as, if not better than, Siri itself.

27. tedkord

Posts: 17418; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

And the original iPhone was a total ripoff of the LG Prada. And the iPad is a rip off of the Fidler tablet. And now Apple are in court arguing that the same differences in size and aspect ratio that they claim don't make the tab different from the iPad, make the iPad different from the Fidler tablet. Maybe Samsung should take a page from Apple's book and bring in Photoshopped pictures of the Fidler tablet next to the iPad.

30. taco50

Posts: 5506; Member since: Oct 08, 2009

Good one a feature phone with a crap interface that no one bought and some obscure tablet. Why can't you admit Samsung copied Apple. It's pretty obvious.

31. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

because that "feature phone" and "obscure tablet" were both out before the iphone and had very similar features, which invalidates Apple's claims. Popularity is not a factor in a design dispute. Wake up.

35. Crossblade

Posts: 224; Member since: Apr 21, 2005

How was the PRADA out before the iPhone? PRADA was announced a few days after the iPhone ...http://www.phonearena.com/news/LG-Prada-phone-offi cially-announced_id1739

33. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

taco is back. our week of peace is over. He's already resuming turbo "fact free" troll mode.

36. Savage unregistered

Yep. And he's banned again now. Not limited, totally banned.

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 https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.