Apple vs. Samsung Jury Decision Open to Challenge

Is the Apple vs. Samsung verdict going to stand? It seems unlikely at this point. Samsung will definitely be appealing—and ever since the jurors have started shooting off their mouths about how they came to their decisions, it’s seeming more and more likely. The case has proved interesting enough that it actually drew Groklaw founder Pamela Jones out of blogging retirement to discuss it. Apart from noticing a pattern of unfairness in how the judge dealt with Apple vs. Samsung, PJ notes that jurors apparently chose not to bother reading the instructions they were issued on how to decide the case.

Perhaps as a result, there were a number of inconsistencies in their decision, such as finding certain devices didn’t infringe—but then awarding over $2 million to Apple for those devices for “inducing” the infringement that they didn’t find. The instructions to the jury were 109 pages long (PDF). And the jury only needed to deliberate for three days?

As legal blog Above the Law put it:

Here’s the thing, ladies and gentlemen of the Apple v. Samsung jury: It would take me more than three days to understand all the terms in the verdict! Much less come to a legally binding decision on all of these separate issues. Did you guys just flip a coin?

Then here we have a juror mentioning that they skipped over consideration of prior art because “it was bogging us down.” The jury foreman, a patent holder himself, wanted to send Samsung “not just a slap on the wrist”—even though the jury instructions specifically said that the purpose of the awards was not punishment, but to compensate the infringement victim for money it lost due to those violations. Samsung will, of course, be exploring every legal avenue to get the verdict thrown out, and comments like these will only give the company more ammunition.

Which could be a good thing if we want more competition in the smartphone and tablet markets. Wired’s article on what the result might mean for consumers suggests it could make things harder for Android manufacturers to design around Apple’s patents. It could also mean Samsung’s devices could be withdrawn from the market.

At any rate, it’s early days yet as far as this case goes—it could be months or years before we know the final outcome. Hopefully the final decision won’t be quite so one-way in Apple’s favor.

Chris Meadows

View posts by Chris Meadows
Chris Meadows, Editor of TeleRead, has been writing about e-books and mobile devices since 1999: first for ThemeStream, later for Jeff Kirvin's Writing on Your Palm, and then for TeleRead starting in 2006. He has also contributed a few articles to The Digital Reader along the way. Chris has bought e-books from Peanut Press/eReader, Fictionwise, Baen, Barnes & Noble, Amazon, the Humble Bundle, and others. He is a strong believer in using Calibre to keep his library organized.


  1. Paul Durrant27 August, 2012

    The way the jury came to their decision cannot be grounds for appeal.

  2. Andrys27 August, 2012

    Even if as Koh corrected them — they found no infringement or inducement on a couple of accounts but award damages anyway ? Yes, they had to change that, but there is an attitude there that is not justice-oriented.

    Also, Koh (sp?) didn’t allow in prior art work that showed the tablet form wasn’t so original. With limited forms for functionality, what about the programming that makes things work — that wasn’t copied. Placement within a tiny frame, yes. Not much choice there. ?

  3. Fbone27 August, 2012

    And the jury doesn’t have to read the Judge’s instructions. They could decide any way they like. It doesn’t need to be consistent or make any sense. They aren’t obligated to follow case law or even the Constitution.

    1. fjtorres27 August, 2012

      Jury Nullification.

      Some folks are grasping at straws.
      Samsung may or not have luck on appeal but jury after-action comments taken out of context are very unlikely to provide the cause.

      Appeals are built off evidence or procedural issues during the trial, not during deliberation.
      So unless they can prove some kind of jury tampering…

      Right now they’d better worry about what judge does about the finding of *willful* infringement. (Trebel damages?)

      1. fjtorres27 August, 2012

        oops… *Treble* damages.

  4. Peter27 August, 2012

    Chris is grasping at straws as always.

    I have a Samsung smartphone, and I DESPISE Apple, so I’d love to say they’re wrong.

    But I can’t. As silly as Apple’s patents sound, the patent office granted them and Samsung willfully infringed them in a direct attempt to compete with Apple.

    This is exactly what patent law is designed to prevent/ punish. Get over it.

  5. New Advert Satirizes Apple-Samsung Lawsuit - AppNewser4 September, 2012

    […] various lawsuits between Apple and one of their largest suppliers/competitors, Samsung, are humming right along with a Pyrrhic victory for Apple in South Korea and an ongoing case in US. […]

  6. […] later won a $1 billion judgment against Samsung. The book doesn’t delve into or even mention the irregularities in that verdict, […]


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Scroll to top