Design Con 2015
Breaking News
Comments
Oldest First | Newest First | Threaded View
betajet
User Rank
CEO
re: Apple vs. Samsung jury hears 84 instructions
betajet   8/21/2012 7:52:40 PM
NO RATINGS
So if the jury would like to get home early, it behooves them to decide that nobody infringed. That way they don't have to deliberate over damages, which could take days. Oracle v. Google was similar, although in that case the trial over damages could not begin unless the jury decided there was infringement. They decided there wasn't any and went home early.

engineer505
User Rank
Rookie
re: Apple vs. Samsung jury hears 84 instructions
engineer505   8/21/2012 8:57:33 PM
NO RATINGS
The possible outcomes are: 1) Samsung infringed 2) Apple infringed 3) Both infringed 4) Neither infringed Any outcome other than the first will compell Apple to take it to Appeals court. Best hope for ending this drama is to find Samsung guilty of infringement (not willfull however) but not to the degree claimed by Apple ...so the damages will be in the $100s of millions which will be further reduced by royalties that Apple will have to pay for Samsung's 3G patents. Neither party is entirely innocent and the market is big enough for both (and a few more) ...it's not in the interest of the consumer or even the future of innovation to let one of these two to dominate the global market! reddy

rick merritt
User Rank
Author
re: Apple vs. Samsung jury hears 84 instructions
rick merritt   8/21/2012 9:02:30 PM
NO RATINGS
A Samsung lawyer told me more than 1,900 pages have now been filed in this case.

markwrob
User Rank
Rookie
re: Apple vs. Samsung jury hears 84 instructions
markwrob   8/21/2012 10:42:23 PM
NO RATINGS
Are any of the jury members technically skilled? Or were all the scientists and engineers in the pool excused as soon as they stated their profession? If we think trials like these are head-scratchers, just imagine what it's like to be one of the actual jurors!

old account Frank Eory
User Rank
Rookie
re: Apple vs. Samsung jury hears 84 instructions
old account Frank Eory   8/21/2012 11:11:22 PM
NO RATINGS
You can bet that the lawyers from both sides wanted to exclude technical people from the jury!

rick merritt
User Rank
Author
re: Apple vs. Samsung jury hears 84 instructions
rick merritt   8/21/2012 11:57:03 PM
NO RATINGS
I was not in court during jury selection but Charlie Babcock, my peer from InformationWeek, was. Here's his story here: http://www.informationweek.com/mobility/smart-phones/apple-vs-samsung-opening-day-in-25-billi/240004611?queryText=babcock%20jury

DrQuine
User Rank
CEO
re: Apple vs. Samsung jury hears 84 instructions
DrQuine   8/22/2012 3:52:40 AM
NO RATINGS
What if the jury reaches a verdict that violates any of the complex instructions from the judge? Is there a mechanism for her to reject the verdict with reference to her instructions and send the jury back for further deliberations or is the only option for Apple or Samsung to appeal on the basis of that issue in another court?

goafrit
User Rank
Manager
re: Apple vs. Samsung jury hears 84 instructions
goafrit   8/22/2012 6:59:00 AM
NO RATINGS
Let me add another one: All infringed. There is no really new in this world. Everyone copies. It is all semantics and lawyers pushing this out of scale.

nicolas.mokhoff
User Rank
Rookie
re: Apple vs. Samsung jury hears 84 instructions
nicolas.mokhoff   8/22/2012 2:51:04 PM
NO RATINGS
I like the judge. She wants to go home early too: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57497096-37/apple-v-samsung-why-is-judge-koh-so-angry/

DrQuine
User Rank
CEO
re: Apple vs. Samsung jury hears 84 instructions
DrQuine   8/25/2012 1:45:58 AM
NO RATINGS
Our legal education continues. In answer to my earlier question about how would the judge treat an error by the jury. The verdict is in and: "After reviewing the complex decision. Judge Koh found two errors. The jury awarded about $219,000 in damages for infringement involving the Galaxy Tab LTE even though it found that the device did not infringe Apple's patents. In addition, it found the Samsung Intercept handset did not infringe but cited it in inducement, a legal impossibility. Judge Koh pointed out the errors to the jury and dismissed to continue deliberations to resolve the $2.5 million question. Both sides are standing by while the legal detail are resolved." - http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4394710/Apple-wins--1-05B-in-Samsung-case?pageNumber=1



Flash Poll
Top Comments of the Week
Like Us on Facebook
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
EE Life
Frankenstein's Fix, Teardowns, Sideshows, Design Contests, Reader Content & More
Max Maxfield

Curiosity Killed the Cat (Just Call Me Mr. Curiosity)
Max Maxfield
23 comments
My wife, Gina The Gorgeous, loves animals. She has two stupid dogs and two stupid cats. How stupid are they? Well, allow me to show you this video of the dogs that I made a couple of years ...

Martin Rowe

No 2014 Punkin Chunkin, What Will You Do?
Martin Rowe
Post a comment
American Thanksgiving is next week, and while some people watch (American) football all day, the real competition on TV has become Punkin Chunkin. But there will be no Punkin Chunkin on TV ...

Rich Quinnell

Making the Grade in Industrial Design
Rich Quinnell
13 comments
As every developer knows, there are the paper specifications for a product design, and then there are the real requirements. The paper specs are dry, bland, and rigidly numeric, making ...

Martin Rowe

Book Review: Controlling Radiated Emissions by Design
Martin Rowe
1 Comment
Controlling Radiated Emissions by Design, Third Edition, by Michel Mardiguian. Contributions by Donald L. Sweeney and Roger Swanberg. List price: $89.99 (e-book), $119 (hardcover).