Impartial jury hard to find in Apple v. Samsung iPhone patent trial

Posted:
in iPhone edited May 15
The ties and opinions of many people in Silicon Valley made it difficult to find a fair jury for an impending Apple v. Samsung damages trial, set to get going this week in a U.S. District Court in San Jose.

applevssamsung-litigation


During selection on Monday, District Judge Lucy Koh excused over half a dozen jurors because they own Apple stock, and another three because their spouses work at Apple or a Samsung subsidiary, CNET said. An electrical engineer working at Google was dismissed after he showed his Android phone and described it as his job.

One potential juror actually had connections to both Apple and Samsung, which led Koh to joke, "Well, you might be fair then."

The demand for impartiality is so strict that jurors were told not to talk about what kind of phones or tablets they own when they take a break. Candidates were also probed on whether they'd heard about the Apple v. Samsung case, which dates back to 2011, and many jurors said they had.

Other jurors were excused for a variety of reasons, such as children, business trips, or potential financial hardship. One person was allowed to go after saying he works on tracking products that compete with Samsung devices.

Koh and case attorneys eventually managed to find the eight necessary jurors. Opening arguments will be heard later on Tuesday.

While Apple initially won a $1 billion verdict against Samsung for infringing on iPhone patents, that sum was later cut dramatically, and an appeals process eventually pushed the matter in front of the U.S. Supreme Court. There a ruling sided with Samsung, arguing that it was unfair to make the company pay for whole device profits when only some elements were infringing.

The dispute was punted back to lower courts. Jurors will have to decide if Apple's request for $1 billion in damages is a fair price for its patent designs. Samsung said it would agree to pay $28 million.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 16
    nunzynunzy Posts: 662member
    It will be hard to find jurors who will be fair to Apple. There are lots of haters out there.

    But Apple has the best lawyers. I'm not worried.
    racerhomie3frankieolswatto_cobra
  • Reply 2 of 16
    croprcropr Posts: 826member
    nunzy said:
    It will be hard to find jurors who will be fair to Apple. There are lots of haters out there.

    But Apple has the best lawyers. I'm not worried.
    But Apple has also a lot of dedicated fans.  And a lot of people are good patriots, they will always be slightly in favour of an American company.  So it will be as hard to find people who are fair to Samsung.
    edited May 15 ols
  • Reply 3 of 16
    Get Blackberry’s customer list... there should be just enough to fill the jury.
    mbenz1962fotoformatcroprboltsfan17bonobobracerhomie3olswatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 4 of 16
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 6,295member
    nunzy said:
    It will be hard to find jurors who will be fair to Apple. There are lots of haters out there.

    But Apple has the best lawyers. I'm not worried.
    When reporting this news C|net chose to include the responses of several prospective jurors who were rabid Apple haters, trashing the company for all the talking points we have had the pleasure of reading, such as the off shore cash hoard, the stock buyback plan, the tax issue, the so-called QA “problem”, etc. On the flip side for Samsung C|net interviewed one guy said he didn’t like either company. Fair and balanced journalism at its finest. This negativity in the press towards Apple does get into the public mind eventually. 
    edited May 15 racerhomie3bshankwatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 5 of 16
    zorinlynxzorinlynx Posts: 169member
    What's crazy is this court case is over patents that aren't even relevant anymore. 

    Both parties should settle and just move on; this is a huge waste of time that's only enriching lawyers. 
  • Reply 6 of 16
    mwhitemwhite Posts: 153member
    zorinlynx said:
    What's crazy is this court case is over patents that aren't even relevant anymore. 

    Both parties should settle and just move on; this is a huge waste of time that's only enriching lawyers. 
    Lawyers have to eat too. haha
    edited May 15 watto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 16
    nunzynunzy Posts: 662member
    lkrupp said:
    nunzy said:
    It will be hard to find jurors who will be fair to Apple. There are lots of haters out there.

    But Apple has the best lawyers. I'm not worried.
    When reporting this news C|net chose to include the responses of several prospective jurors who were raid Apple haters, trashing the company for all the talking points we have had the pleasure of reading, such as the off shore cash hoard, the stock buyback plan, the tax issue, the so-called QA “problem”, etc. On the flip side for Samsung C|net interviewed one guy said he didn’t like either company. Fair and balanced journalism at its finest. This negativity in the press towards Apple does get into the public mind eventually. 
      CNET doesn't just hate Apple. They hate each and every one of us too.
  • Reply 8 of 16
    retrogustoretrogusto Posts: 654member
    I’d like to volunteer my services. Lawyers, feel free to iMessage me if you’d like to interview me for the position. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 9 of 16
    By now all smartphones are all look-alike. This case is becoming blur and irrelevant among jury. It's like looking at which car model is copying which car.
  • Reply 10 of 16
    silvergold84silvergold84 Posts: 22unconfirmed, member
    Maybe don’t appear so , but all the world look at this sentence. Android don’t sell much because people understood is a bad system. Google violated Apple patents. Look at the smartphones before and after the first iPhone . It’s time that android pay for that. Android should be blocked. Because try to offer a similar system , but in bad quality, using unatorized patents of Apple . And for many years they cheated market to iPhone (when people were buy it before know how much bad quality have android). 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 16
    nunzynunzy Posts: 662member
    Maybe don’t appear so , but all the world look at this sentence. Android don’t sell much because people understood is a bad system. Google violated Apple patents. Look at the smartphones before and after the first iPhone . It’s time that android pay for that. Android should be blocked. Because try to offer a similar system , but in bad quality, using unatorized patents of Apple . And for many years they cheated market to iPhone (when people were buy it before know how much bad quality have android). 
    Android is a stolen OS. Google tried to use it to kill the iPhone.
    watto_cobracrosslad
  • Reply 12 of 16
    mcdavemcdave Posts: 947member
    By now all smartphones are all look-alike. This case is becoming blur and irrelevant among jury. It's like looking at which car model is copying which car.
    That’s just the problem, it’s about copying to seize market share.  And your right it’s the overall form, not the ashtray, that’s been stolen.  If this goes through Apple should be able to follow through with all plagiarism since. Given 4 out of 5 tent pole features on each Android release are direct lifts from iOS the next cases should be huge.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 13 of 16
    crossladcrosslad Posts: 458member
    Android as always copied iOS and is still doing so today. When the iPhone X launched all the fandroids made fun of the notch and the swipe gestures. Now virtually every new android phone being released has the notch and the new version of android, which should be on 10% of android phones by 2021, has copied the swipe gestures. 
  • Reply 14 of 16
    District Judge Lucy Koh should recuse *herself* from the case because she is biased against Apple, as is clear from several earlier trials.
  • Reply 15 of 16
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 19,049member
    mcdave said:
    By now all smartphones are all look-alike. This case is becoming blur and irrelevant among jury. It's like looking at which car model is copying which car.
    That’s just the problem, it’s about copying to seize market share.  And your right it’s the overall form, not the ashtray, that’s been stolen.  If this goes through Apple should be able to follow through with all plagiarism since. Given 4 out of 5 tent pole features on each Android release are direct lifts from iOS the next cases should be huge.
    Except there won't be any "next cases". It's done and over. Google and Apple have reached détente for reasons known to themselves and the only reason this Samsung/Apple action is still in play IMO is to establish the underlying case law, which has now been done, to allow the damages total to be finalized. 
    edited May 16
  • Reply 16 of 16
    sunman42sunman42 Posts: 52member
    By now all smartphones are all look-alike. This case is becoming blur and irrelevant among jury. It's like looking at which car model is copying which car.
    Or it would be if one of the litigating parties had invented the automobile, was the first to put pneumatic tires on it, the first to include a heater and air conditioner, a winshield, and side windows that raised an lowered.
Sign In or Register to comment.