Apple has failed in its attempt to obtain a permanent ban on several Samsung products in the US, but Samsung's accusations of jury misconduct have also been rejected. As she has so many times before, Judge Lucy Koh kept things even between Apple and Samsung by rejecting most of their requests. After Apple won $1bn in its patent …
"which include Cupertino patents"
This should be universally named "Cupertino's pretends".
The actions of this jury-fanbois during the trial and after it are what should invalidate the whole thing. The judge here is wrong to say that samsung are stuffed as they didn't find this out during jury selection. How can questioning highlight the fact he was going to hide information and "steer" other members decisions?
Overcompensating, incompetent or fanboi
Doesn't matter. The judge Koh basically ignored the elephant in the room, the gross misconduct by the imbecile Hogan, including the fact he lied during voir dire, and just pretended not to be too partial by not blocking Samsung's devices.
As it had been seen almost from the beginning of the trial, the judge is either overcompensating for her origins, blatantly incompetent or a rabid fanboi, most of her decisions have been pro-apple.
Re: Overcompensating, incompetent or fanboi
Judge Lucy Koh is obviously biased. Everybody knows that. The Apple fanbois know that she's biased towards Samsung. Just go read any Mac forum to see how much they hate her. Then the Samsung fanbois claim that's she's biased towards Apple. She just can't win.
Now where's that popcorn icon we asked the Reg for?
Re: Overcompensating, incompetent or fanboi
Desperate - the judge was not convinced - everyone likes a good conspiracy story even if there is little fact to back it up.
As she has so many times before, Judge Lucy Koh kept things even between Apple and Samsung
Um, what? That hasn't been my perception at all. It's looked to me like she's behaved as an Apple fanboi throughout the whole trial. The fact that she's disallowed a new trial despite that fact that there was clearly jury misconduct (and I'm not talking about the weak 'conflict of interest' argument here) is just the icing on the cake.
Ever considered maybe you have your own axes to grind and may not be completely impartial??
'clearly jury misconduct'
Because you are the expert - Rumpole? You don't like the verdict so assume the one jury member was out to get Samsung and coerced all the others (who were so weak willed and ignored all they heard from the trial) to vote his way - then he goes and blabs it to the press. Ever considered he was out for some publicity and perhaps the others voted the way they decided to vote regardless of him?
I reckon she's just chosen the most direct route to get it away from herself.
This is nothing more than fuck you both, take it elsewhere response. I can't blame her.
ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED? IS THAT NOT WHY YOU ARE HERE?
$amsung = $amsung - $1.05bn
Just wait for the appeal!
Do you really think justice is ruled by the mood of a single juror ? It would be too simple.
Adding up the two decisions are largely favoring Samsung. Suddenly they no longer have to hurry with the appeal.They can confidently drag their feet for a couple of years risking at worst a few hundred millions punishment while busily selling their (in my personal opinion only) rather good looking and affordable devices.
error in formula
amsung = $amsung -$1.05bn + (0.2 x A6 CPU sold until 2014)
Which is about 400,000 x $2.60 give or take some pretty large rounding errors.
Want to talk about irreperable harm?
All the legal jockeying is doing irreperable harm to my childish ideas that companies succeed by innovating and delivering superior value to customers.
Otherwise, good for Judge Koh!
I get the distinct impression here that a lot of comments are not based on the Apple v Samsung case but a parallel Apple v Android case. As Samsung are the current flag bearers for Android any action against them is construed as an 'attack' on Android.
If Samsung were exclusively a Windows phone manufacturer, would there have been so much anti-Apple froth or barmy jury conspiracy theories.
Samsung will get their time in court again when they appeal.
You'd think it would be easier for Samsung to just get a legal team to have the patents thrown out for prior art or obviousness.
Re: Patent angle
What makes you think that's not happening? As time passes Apple is gradually getting it's patents ruled invalid and in parallel established a record of losing in every court but this one.
Samsung just bought themselves 9-36months injunction free delay waiting on their appeal. Delay while Apples weapons gets taken slowly apart by all the others they threatened. Also not well reported here, the design patents were criticised by Koh in the ruling and their weakness is part of why there are no injunctions. Fighting Samsung has damaged Apples IP claims quite well already.
Sounds like a sensible decision to me. I want the legal system to make it so pointless to pursue legal action in these cases that these companies go back to their day jobs, i.e building phones and competing in the marketplace.
Error number one.
Samsung DID ask the Juror about his previous court experience, and about his impartiality... he apparently lied.
Error number two.
The juror himself has stated (confirmed by the other jurors) what arguments he used to convince the other jurors of Samsung being guilty... His arguments were so so flawed they were beyond wrong! Therefore, he convinced the jury using very VERY faulty "logic"... By THEIR OWN ADMISSION.
The judge SPECIFICALLY instructed the Jury they they were NOT to calculate damages in a punitive way. Damage was supposed to be granted based on ACTUAL lost value... the jury, influenced by the juror, by their own admission... imposed punitive damages... wtf!?
The jury SO didn't even pay attention ton their decision that they declared one product non infringing... but STILL decided to award damages on that "non" infringement...
And you want to call that JUSTICE???
I don't own a Samsung OR an Apple device of any kind, and I don't give a rats ass who wins... but come ON!!! You can't seriously stand there and argue that there nothing wrong here!!!