Reuters and CNet have interviewed members of the Apple / Samsung patent trial jury who awarded Apple over $1 billion in damages over patent infringement claims against Samsung.
Reuters spoke with jury foreman Velvin Hogan who explained that they found Apple's arguments persuasive about the need to protect innovation. Furthermore, Hogan says it was "absolutely" clear based on Samsung executive testimony that the infringement was purposeful.
In the CNet interview with another Apple v. Samsung juror, Manuel Ilagan reiterated that it was "clear there was infringement". When asked for specifics, he said:
"Well, there were several. The e-mails that went back and forth from Samsung execs about the Apple features that they should incorporate into their devices was pretty damning to me. And also, on the last day, they showed the pictures of the phones that Samsung made before the iPhone came out and ones that they made after the iPhone came out. Some of the Samsung executives they presented on video [testimony] from Korea -- I thought they were dodging the questions. They didn't answer one of them. They didn't help their cause."
Both jurors claim that their decision was deliberate and not rushed. According to Ilagan, the process was helped by the experience within the jury pool. Hogan, the jury foreman, had previously worked as an engineer and holds a patent himself. Meanwhile, others on the jury were said to also have engineering and legal experience.
In determining the award amount, Hogan reports that they felt Apple's demands of $2.75 billion was "extraordinarily high", especially taking into account the uncertainty in Apple's ability to have sold significantly more iPhones due to component supply constraints. That said, Hogan told Reuters they did want a send a message.
"We didn't want to give carte blanche to a company, by any name, to infringe someone else's intellectual property," Hogan told Reuters a day after the verdict.
Sunday November 17, 2024 5:18 am PST by Joe Rossignol
Apple released the AirTag in April 2021, so it is now three over and a half years old. While the AirTag has not received any hardware updates since then, a new version of the item tracking accessory is rumored to be in development.
Below, we recap rumors about a second-generation AirTag.
Timing
Apple is aiming to release a new AirTag in mid-2025, according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman....
Sunday November 17, 2024 3:03 pm PST by Joe Rossignol
While the Logitech MX Master 3 is a terrific mouse for the Mac, reports claiming that Apple CEO Tim Cook prefers that mouse over the Magic Mouse are false.
The Wall Street Journal last month published an interview with Cook, in which he said he uses every Apple product every day. Soon after, The Verge's Wes Davis attempted to replicate using every Apple product in a single day. During that...
Wednesday November 13, 2024 2:09 am PST by Tim Hardwick
Apple is set to release iOS 18.2 next month, bringing the second round of Apple Intelligence features to iPhone 15 Pro and iPhone 16 models. This update brings several major advancements to Apple's AI integration, including completely new image generation tools and a range of Visual Intelligence-based enhancements. There are a handful of new non-AI related feature controls incoming as well....
Monday November 18, 2024 1:07 pm PST by Joe Rossignol
In a research note with Hong Kong-based investment bank Haitong today, obtained by MacRumors, Apple analyst Jeff Pu said he agrees with a recent rumor claiming that the so-called "iPhone 17 Air" will be around 6mm thick.
"We agreed with the recent chatter of an 6mm thickness ultra-slim design of the iPhone 17 Slim model," he wrote.
If that measurement proves to be accurate, there would be ...
Sunday November 17, 2024 12:33 pm PST by Joe Rossignol
It appears that Apple is discontinuing the Lightning to 3.5mm headphone jack adapter that it released alongside the iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus in 2016.
The adapter was recently listed as "sold out" on Apple's online store in the U.S. and most other countries, according to MacRumors contributor Aaron Perris. The adapter remains available from Apple in only a handful of countries, such as...
Sunday November 17, 2024 5:27 am PST by Joe Rossignol
Between around 2009 and 2011, it was repeatedly rumored that Apple would be releasing a TV, but that obviously never happened.
Now, a decade-and-a-half later, Bloomberg's Mark Gurman says the idea is back on the table.
In his Power On newsletter today, Gurman briefly mentioned that Apple has been "evaluating" the "idea of making an Apple-branded TV set." He did not provide any further...
This is a sad day. And I say this as an Apple fan.
I love their products, but they seem to be turning into bigger and bigger control freaks as time goes on. I'm worried about Apple becoming *too successful*, because if they do they are likely to engage in monopolistic practices, which still stifle innovation and give people little choice in platform.
Apple really needs to learn to play well with others.
I still don't understand how stopping Samsung from coping Apple is stifling innovation...
I think they made the right decision. Samsung clearly copied and infringed on Apple's patents, Apple told them to stop many times, offered to licence it to them but Samsung still refused to cooperate so Apple sued them. Serves them right.
This is a sad day. And I say this as an Apple fan.
I love their products, but they seem to be turning into bigger and bigger control freaks as time goes on. I'm worried about Apple becoming *too successful*, because if they do they are likely to engage in monopolistic practices, which still stifle innovation and give people little choice in platform.
Apple really needs to learn to play well with others.
What this jury verdict says is that Apple has the right to protect their intellectual property and that Samsung is guilty of lifting Apple's innovation despite the fact that Apple had offered Samsung several times to license their property.
I will also point out that Samsung is the worldwide leader in unit marketshare of smartphones.
Samsung dominates the market by selling lots of devices that -- according to this jury -- are crammed full of Apple intellectual property. Apple has a long way to go to reach what would be a monopoly.
You should understand that the jury members are interpreting US patent law and aren't employees of Apple Inc. nor Samsung. As a matter of fact, any Apple or Samsung employees would have been weeded out during the jury selection process.
The jury is not telling anyone to stop innovating. They are telling Samsung to do their own innovation and not to steal stuff from Apple and saying it is theirs. Due to the lack of congressional foresight, current patent law has no actionable provision for "finders keepers, losers weepers" or "share your toys with the other kids in the sandbox."
Now, if you think the US patent system is broken, that's an entirely different (and arguably valid) discussion, however the jury is instructed to base their verdict on existing and active law.
These laws weren't written to favor one specific company (like Apple, Coca-Cola, Microsoft, Wonderbra, whoever).
You have understood nothing about this entire legal action.
Manuel Ilagan, that is NOT evidence in regards to what you were supposed to decided on.:rolleyes:
Apparently Coca-Cola should sue Pepsi for Sierra Mist because they decided they want a lemon-lime soda like Sprite.
Uh, the jury needs to consider all the evidence presented at trial. It's a little strange that you feel you can redefine the rules of evidence used at trial in an internet forum.
Manuel Ilagan, that is NOT evidence in regards to what you were supposed to decided on.:rolleyes:
Apparently Coca-Cola should sue Pepsi for Sierra Mist because they decided they want a lemon-lime soda like Sprite.
And they would definitely sue Pepsi if they copied.
----------
This is a sad day. And I say this as an Apple fan.
I love their products, but they seem to be turning into bigger and bigger control freaks as time goes on. I'm worried about Apple becoming *too successful*, because if they do they are likely to engage in monopolistic practices, which still stifle innovation and give people little choice in platform.
Apple really needs to learn to play well with others.
Samsung is the one that needs to learn to play well with others - this has been going on for years and years with them.
