Apple versus Samsung: Jury foreman justifies $1bn verdict • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple versus Samsung: Jury foreman justifies $1bn verdict

#21

Post by mtgx » Fri, Aug 31, 2012, 10:44 AM UTC

upinsmoke wrote: post #3

antihero wrote: post #2

Ideal outcome: Samsung keeps producing awesome handsets, but uses stock Android instead of Touchwiz.

They won't. It will be very hard to differentiate themselves from thousands of other Android devices.

They seem quite happy using WP7/WP8, though...How come that logic doesn't apply there? Sure WP7 is not that popular yet, but the point is they would want it to be popular as well to have a strong alternative to Android. And at that point they'd be in square one, with a lot of other companies developing devices with identical software, just like in the PC business, which is another market Samsung seems happy to be in.

So yeah, I don't buy that argument. Sure they'd prefer if they'd do their own thing, but I'm sure they wouldn't be too mad about if it if all they could use was stock Android (which by the way, they seem to be using in their Galaxy Camera).

If Google is the only one making a cross-license with Apple, then that scenario is even more likely, because the deal would obviously cover only Google's own software implementations, and not Samsung's or anybody else's. So then if a company wants legal protection against Apple, they'd have no choice but to use stock Android. Win for them, win for us. If some decide to keep on making their own custom software, then the legal risk is all on them.

Re: Apple versus Samsung: Jury foreman justifies $1bn verdict

#22

Post by dsirijus » Fri, Aug 31, 2012, 10:44 AM UTC

sbuk wrote: post #19

This is getting rediculous. This has been discussed as nauseum without either side agreeing. Picking over the bones of the trial while writing untold paragraphs about the whys and whatfores is wasting cycles. Wait until the appeal, of it is allowed, and see. One thing to note though. There has been an awful lot of cogantive bias exhibited by both sides. It must stop. It just leads to flaming and even more wasted time…

I rather interpret it as internal struggle within people themselves. Personally, I go from Android to iOS fanboyism within a blink of an eye. I own both because of this internal indecisiveness.

On one side you have awesome hardware and jail, on other not so great hardware and a lot less restrictions.

I think that's what's driving all this, not camps on either side.

Re: Apple versus Samsung: Jury foreman justifies $1bn verdict

#23

Post by skorgu » Fri, Aug 31, 2012, 10:44 AM UTC

ars wrote: post #12

cremnob wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is his full answer: "Prior art was considered. But the stipulation under the law is for the prior art to be sufficient to negate or invalidate Apple's patents in this case, it had to be sufficiently similar or, more importantly, it had to be interchangeable. And in example after example, when we put it to the test, the older prior art was just that. Not that there's anything [wrong] with older prior art - but th…

I read the full quote and it's wrong. Period. If "interchangeable code" was the standard then why apply it only to prior art? Why not apply it to future art as well? (Samsungs implementation.) It looks like this jury just made stuff up. And I really hope the judgment gets completely tossed for this. The judge has yet to rule on that (although it's rare to toss a jury verdict since they actually are allowed to make st…

Yup. The specific jury instructions regarding prior art are online[0]. They're pretty clear and pretty clearly contradict the foreman's interpretation of prior art.

[0] http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20120828225612963

Re: Apple versus Samsung: Jury foreman justifies $1bn verdict

#24

Post by oliwarner » Fri, Aug 31, 2012, 10:44 AM UTC

Apple should be asking for a mistrial without prejudice at this point.

If they don't (and the judge doesn't), Samsung is going to flip this decision like a pancake in appeals just on the interviews of the foreman.

Unless a temporary sales ban is worth more to Apple...

Re: Apple versus Samsung: Jury foreman justifies $1bn verdict

#25

Post by option_greek » Fri, Aug 31, 2012, 10:46 AM UTC

neya wrote: post #13

>Not that there's anything [wrong] with older prior art - but the key was that the hardware was different, the software was an entirely different methodology, and the more modern software could not be loaded onto the older example and be run without error. That guy is just bullshitting everyone and assuming we are all idiots. The same could be said for Apple too, in defense of Samsung, right? EDIT: The way I see it -…

I'm no iFan but I think this is a little too cynical. Also more than money, you are ruling out a major factor - sympathy for the home team. I still have faith that this ridiculous ruling will be overturned in an appeal.

Re: Apple versus Samsung: Jury foreman justifies $1bn verdict

#26

Post by andyjohnson0 » Fri, Aug 31, 2012, 10:50 AM UTC

cremnob wrote: post #10

ars wrote: post #5

This quote really bugs me: "Not that there's anything [wrong] with older prior art - but the key was that the hardware was different, the software was an entirely different methodology, and the more modern software could not be loaded onto the older example and be run without error." That's just wrong - if it was correct then you could say the same thing about samsung: Samsung's code won't run an an Apple machine, so…

Here is his full answer: "Prior art was considered. But the stipulation under the law is for the prior art to be sufficient to negate or invalidate Apple's patents in this case, it had to be sufficiently similar or, more importantly, it had to be interchangeable. And in example after example, when we put it to the test, the older prior art was just that. Not that there's anything [wrong] with older prior art - but th…

The jury foreman seems to feel that he is some kind of expert on technology patents. Two quotes for the article: "Velvin Hogan said his familiarity with the US patent system helped the jury reach its verdict so quickly" and "Let's say if there had not been an individual who had the technical background, and there had not been an individual who had gone through the process, the verdict might have been different - or it might have been the same."

Is it appropriate for a juror to apply their own legal knowledge in this way? I thought that experts were heard as part of the trial process, with the judge advising the jury on the law? Can someone with knowledge of how things work in the US comment on this?

I seriously wonder whether this interview will form the basis of an appeal by Samsung. I certainly hope so.

Re: Apple versus Samsung: Jury foreman justifies $1bn verdict

#27

Post by danmaz74 » Fri, Aug 31, 2012, 10:56 AM UTC

"but the key was that the hardware was different, the software was an entirely different methodology, and the more modern software could not be loaded onto the older example and be run without error."

This is just RIDICULOUS. By this line of thought, every time new hardware or software methodologies come out, you could patent the same old software solutions again!

If reimplementing a well known feature, algorithm, or whatever on new hardware isn't obvious "for a practitioner skilled in the art", then I really don't know what is.

Re: Apple versus Samsung: Jury foreman justifies $1bn verdict

#28

Post by Shivetya » Fri, Aug 31, 2012, 11:25 AM UTC

sbuk wrote: post #19

This is getting rediculous. This has been discussed as nauseum without either side agreeing. Picking over the bones of the trial while writing untold paragraphs about the whys and whatfores is wasting cycles. Wait until the appeal, of it is allowed, and see. One thing to note though. There has been an awful lot of cogantive bias exhibited by both sides. It must stop. It just leads to flaming and even more wasted time…

the bias started with the jury. They had a self declared expert as their foreman. That he was able to sit on the jury astounds me and from the other stories its obvious other members of the jury deferred to him. Hence the assumption I have is, he took his "knowledge" of the system and decided before the trial was complete. It is about the only way to explain the speed of which they arrived at their decision.

Have you ever been in a group where one person is so obnoxious with their views you just want it over?

Re: Apple versus Samsung: Jury foreman justifies $1bn verdict

#29

Post by rbanffy » Fri, Aug 31, 2012, 11:27 AM UTC

neya wrote: post #18

crash013 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am going to be disillusioned with HN if this uninformed speculation isn't buried.

So you conclude the patent system and the legal structure is fine as it is? Because, my conclusion is the opposite from all the points I make above.

False dichotomy alert: the patent system may be broken in ways other than your speculation.

I don't think bribes were involved, for instance.

Also, it's wise not to attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by incompetence. This jury was obviously incompetent and manipulated (even if not deliberately) by a foreman with his own agenda.

Another one a good friend once taught me: when you think you have figured out something nobody else did, odds are you're wrong. He used lines on a bank as an example: if there are two lines and one is much smaller than the other, they are probably not interchangeable and, if you enter the short one, you may realize you entered the wrong one.

Re: Apple versus Samsung: Jury foreman justifies $1bn verdict

#30

Post by rbanffy » Fri, Aug 31, 2012, 11:28 AM UTC

rustynails77 wrote: post #8

jerrya wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're both wrong! I like the hardware of the SGII I have, and I would prefer the hardware of the Galaxy Note, or the Galaxy Note II. But also, remove TouchWiz, and still the Galaxy Note II has some very nice and innovative software allowing for pseudo-windowing on Android, as well as "Pen" aware apps.

The problem is that when Samsung customise Android, they do so to (a) differentiate, and (b) to ensure you can't upgrade. On a more "on topic" note, this juror is a turkey. As another poster pretty much said "prior art can not be ignored".

You can upgrade. And, as a bonus, you get rid of Touchwiz.