Overly complex verdict questionnaire could confuse jury, judge says [u]
Apple v. Samsung presiding Judge Lucy Koh on Monday voiced her opinion on the parties' tentative jury verdict forms, saying the 21-page document could confuse jurors with its complexity.
Update: Judge Koh late Monday released another draft of the verdict form (see bottom of article) to be discussed on Tuesday.
Apple and Samsung are still in the process of hammering out a final version of the form, but what they presented to Judge Koh on Monday may add another layer of unnecessary complexity to a case already loaded with technical patent minutiae.
According to in-court reports from CNET, Judge Koh herself admitted to being somewhat confused by the tentative verdict form.
"I am worried we might have a seriously confused jury here," Judge Koh said. "I have trouble understanding this, and I have spent a little more time with this than they have." She described the 21-page document as being "so complex, and there are so many pieces here."
The jurors will be tasked with deciding which patents, if any, were infringed upon by devices made by both companies. Apple is asserting three utility patents and four design patents against over 20 Samsung smartphones and tablets, while the Korean company is leveraging five utility patents against certain iPhone, iPad and iPod touch models.
"Looking at the verdict form, this is even more granular than anything Samsung has proposed," said Apple attorney Michael Jacobs, referring to the Korean company's proposed verdict form.
Closing arguments are scheduled for Tuesday, with each side having two hours to wrap up their case. Jury deliberations will begin soon after to be followed by a verdict that could come as soon as this week.
Updated Verdict Form
Update: Judge Koh late Monday released another draft of the verdict form (see bottom of article) to be discussed on Tuesday.
Apple and Samsung are still in the process of hammering out a final version of the form, but what they presented to Judge Koh on Monday may add another layer of unnecessary complexity to a case already loaded with technical patent minutiae.
According to in-court reports from CNET, Judge Koh herself admitted to being somewhat confused by the tentative verdict form.
"I am worried we might have a seriously confused jury here," Judge Koh said. "I have trouble understanding this, and I have spent a little more time with this than they have." She described the 21-page document as being "so complex, and there are so many pieces here."
The jurors will be tasked with deciding which patents, if any, were infringed upon by devices made by both companies. Apple is asserting three utility patents and four design patents against over 20 Samsung smartphones and tablets, while the Korean company is leveraging five utility patents against certain iPhone, iPad and iPod touch models.
"Looking at the verdict form, this is even more granular than anything Samsung has proposed," said Apple attorney Michael Jacobs, referring to the Korean company's proposed verdict form.
Closing arguments are scheduled for Tuesday, with each side having two hours to wrap up their case. Jury deliberations will begin soon after to be followed by a verdict that could come as soon as this week.
Updated Verdict Form
Comments
Judge Koh needs to stop being a pussy and go ahead and make a verdict. She is avoiding it at all costs and it PISSES ME OFF
I'm under the assumption most people just don't care about either company one way or the other.
You can say that again.
Jeesh. I was on a jury today on a sexual assault case and there were only two verdicts to reach.
Quote:
Originally Posted by logandigges
Judge Koh needs to stop being a pussy and go ahead and make a verdict. She is avoiding it at all costs and it PISSES ME OFF
It's Jury trial. That can't happen. The Jury decides the "matters of fact"... that is, whether anyone infringes on anyone, does damage, willfully infringes, etc.
The Jury can even determine the value of those damages ( as they are requested to do in this trial, if you read the questionnaire )
The Judge isn't deciding anything but matters of law...making sure the trail proceeds properly and that the jury isn't manipulated.
The Judge can't change what the jury says or does unless it's found to be unlawful.
This is why the song and dance is coming from Samsung ( and to a lesser degree, Apple ). They are presenting amazingly complex and subtle things to a jury, and some might say they're also trying to misdirect and manipulate the jury.
I do think Judge Koh is too tolerant of Samsung's behavior. She's trying to make sure a "more than fair" trial, and I think that's wrong.
I'd like to believe you are right.
It is far less than you could possibly imagine.
Looking at this form
A) I pity this jury
I wonder If the jury can request each of the products in question back to the jury room for review... I seriously doubt anyone knows all the Samsung products.
Could this be an attempt to get an "innocent by jury attrition" verdict?
Tire the jury out, it's just so much easier to say no than to say yes and go through all this work to determine damages.
Oy!
???
You are a law student obviously /s
Ever heard of a jury?
Here in Canada, the "I don't want to be on a Jury" in-joke seen in the US never happens. I've known at least three people in the US who has had Jury duty, and nobody in Canada.
This form seems like cruel and unusual punishment, and seems to assume more technical prowness of the jury than could reasonably be expected. Even when you see people on jury duty in fictional media, they're never given a 20 page exam. It's always something like "okay everyone, who thinks they're guilty?" Everyone puts a slip of paper into the hat, and either everyone agrees or disagrees, and then the rest of the story swings around the one juror trying to change everyone's mind.
Hey, but Android is about giving the consumer choice and that's good right? So we have this 21 page form for you to fill out and make your choice. We've made it so easy for you because we have 1,000 people designing icons...
FAILED
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips
I wonder if the jury is made up of Apple lovers and Apple haters like the rest of the USA and their decisions were made before the trial even started.
No, the jury is made up of Luddites that were found wandering aimlessly and naked in an Arkansas swamp. They were selected because they are incapable of making an informed opinion or forming a sentence that requires interior punctuation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Misa
Here in Canada, the "I don't want to be on a Jury" in-joke seen in the US never happens. I've known at least three people in the US who has had Jury duty, and nobody in Canada.
This form seems like cruel and unusual punishment, and seems to assume more technical prowness of the jury than could reasonably be expected. Even when you see people on jury duty in fictional media, they're never given a 20 page exam. It's always something like "okay everyone, who thinks they're guilty?" Everyone puts a slip of paper into the hat, and either everyone agrees or disagrees, and then the rest of the story swings around the one juror trying to change everyone's mind.
Nothing personal but as a person living in Canada I don't know what you are talking about. The jury system up here is pretty much the same as the US. Just because you haven't known anyone that's been on one up here ... well, that's a pretty meaningless statistic isn't it?
Also, it's hard to tell from the bad writing in the main article whether the form is actually a Samsung one or an Apple one or a joint one (it seems to imply the latter), but I don't get why everyone is talking about how "complex" it is.
It's a grid for cripes sake. You fill in the grid with "yes" and/or "no." The deciding factor in the yeses and nos, is written at the top of each grid (what patent the grid refers to).
If the jury is too dumb to figure out a grid of yeses and nos, or is unsure what the patents that the trial is based on are all about then all is lost. Might as well throw dice if the jury is as dim or "challenged" as many people here seem to be.
I repeat ... it's a grid.
The only thing simpler would be ticks and x's instead of yes and no.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Napoleon_PhoneApart
Jeesh. I was on a jury today on a sexual assault case and there were only two verdicts to reach.
Was it:
(A) a legitimate sex assault?
(B) an illegitimate sex assault?
Ah screw this, I want to go home & play Xbox…
yes, no, yes, no, yes, no…
Like this. Skip to the 1 min mark.
[VIDEO]