Hacker News Reader

Comment by lubos | Hacker News Reader

I was shocked to learn this case is basically being decided by people who have no idea what they are really deciding on.

Here is the jury according to techcrunch

1. An electrical engineer 2. A homemaker 3. A construction worker 4. A young unemployed man who likes video games 5. An insurance agent 6. An ex-Navy avionics technician 7. A store operations manager for a cycling retailer 8. A project manager for wireless carrier AT&T 9. A benefits and payroll manager who works with startups

http://techcrunch.com/2012/08/21/apple-samsung/

Only in America?? And how many of those people are biased because they just love Steve Jobs and Apple products. I know for sure, my mom loves her Mac and she wouldn't think twice who is right and who is wrong in this case.

View on HN

Knowing this audience, I'll probably get downvoted, but I'll say it anyway.

That's rather cynical. This is precisely the kind of trial that doesn't require expert thinking because most of what is up for debate is whether Samsung willfully attempted to fool customers into thinking that their products were just like an iPhone by copying the trade dress. And determining such a thing is a matter of common sense.

This reminds me of an anecdote about Brahms's first symphony:

Brahms himself said, when comment was made on the similarity with Beethoven, "any ass can see that." [1]

So it is here. We needn't pretend any longer that Samsung's designs are mere coincidence. Whether it should be punishable is another question, but under the current law this, to me, is the right call.

1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symphony_No._1_(Brahms)#History

Reports already show that the jurors had not idea what they were doing. Many of the claims they made had no actual basis of infringement.

This reeks heavily of people that had little idea about how the system actually works and gave verdicts that were more speculative rather than grounded and based on hard acts of actual infringement.

http://techcrunch.com/2012/08/24/hang-on-a-minute-jurors-awa...

Honest question: Would you have the same opinion if the jury decided the other way?

Honest answer: I would.

Even more honest answer: I'd probably let the Apple fanboys share the injustice to the world.

Well, then there's no one to blame but the parts involved. For weeks they called witnesses and experts to the stand to explain the jury their claims. They should have bring better experts or explain things better. Also, both parts agreed on the jury during the selection process.

Sorry buy you're definitely wrong there.

It is not "many of the claims" it is one claim for one phone out of what 15+ that were covered in the case. It is quite understandable that there would be at least one mistake out of the all patent/phone combinations.

Then how do you explain this:

"The judge is writing a note to the jury to point out exactly what the inconsistencies are, because they couldn’t seem to tell from going over the document themselves."

Poor judge who was reading it seems to be more switched on than people who were writing it. I'm sure court room felt like an elementary school at that point.

There was a great comment on the Verge (lol it's true) the other day about just this by someone who had been in a similar jury:

http://www.theverge.com/2012/8/23/3260463/apple-samsung-jury...

I actually have some experience with this. I recently “second chaired” a very complex civil trial involving significant accounting issues. The presentation of evidence alone took 5 weeks. The verdict form was almost as complex as the one described here. We all expected the verdict form to come back a self-contradictory mess, but in fact the jury had no problem sorting through it all. The verdicts were perfectly consistent and logical, as were the damage awards. And unlike the Apple/Samsung jury, our jury mostly consisted of homemakers and people from working class backgrounds, so we couldn’t expect them to have comfort with the subject matter. My take on this was that the jurors understood they were deciding a dispute worth tens of millions of dollars and really wanted to reach the right result. So we might see the same thing in this case. On the other hand, my trial involved “real people” with names and faces, not faceless corporations like Apple and Samsung. It is possible that the jurors had a higher level of engagement under the circumstances.

Honestly that sounds like the perfect group to decide this. The whole point of this lawsuit is to prove that your average Joe would have a hard time distinguishing Samsung's product from Apple's.

It seems like there's an Average Joe approving tech patents as well.

>> people who have no idea what they are really deciding on

I thought the lawyers, judge and witnesses provide all the information they need to make the decision.

>> And how many of those people are biased because they just love Steve Jobs

I would think that Samsung's lawyers would have disqualified those types of people during the selection process.

Indeed, and early on an Apple employee disqualified himself.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/07/apple-v-samsung-j...

Another potential juror, a UI designer on the Android team was rejected by Apple.

You seem to vastly underestimate the intelligence of the average person, and you fail to realize how serious people take jury duty once they have been picked.

It is important to realize that a jury trial is a seminar for the jury. It is given by two opposing sides to a disinterested party tasked to make a decision. If either side fails to inform the jury of the enormity or ramifications of their decision, it is the fault of that side.

And how serious the lawyers are with jury selection. Each side does a lot of scrutiny to get a sense of biases and ability to grasp the subject.

It's easy to complain about the verdict, but taking pot-shots at the jury is so cheap.

This

The case is being decided by people that Samsung and Apple chose, out of the random pool of potential jurors: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_selection

Try finding an impartial "geek" to set on this jury. Good luck.

If Samsung can't convince this lot - they couldn't it seems. So their only hope is the appeals court. But I got a feeling they'll drop that too.

Samsung's best approach is to pay. And move on.

I think the argument for infringement is a lot easier to make to a non-sophisticated audience than it is to an audience who understand patents. A non-sophisticated audience can be won-over with pictures showing product similarities and the suggestion of - 'look, they copied!'

It is also high on the conscious of American consumers that Apple is an innovative company that is readily ripped off by foreign companies.

FWIW I think the patent system is a lot more complicated than what a lot of geeks would understand as well. It really should be decided by a panel of judges and/or experts who can evaluate the case on merits and justify each decision.

Yeah, we need ubergeeks like Stallman deciding this case (I'm sure it's not necessary, but: </sarcasm>).

No tech-savvy geek is unbiased. We both know it. If I were sitting on that jury, I'd be one hell of a biased juror who'd shout myself hoarse trying to terrorize other jurors to agree with me. Believe me, you don't want me deciding your billion-dollar case.

Well, that's what "jury of one's peers" is all about, a broad spectrum of the population.

Well if corporations are people and Apple is the biggest company ever (in terms of market capitalization), who are their peers? It's kind of funny that at least in one arena the big players are accountable to average Joes and Josephines, even if those people disagree with me on certain patents' validity.

Isn't that how a jury is suppose to work though? They're suppose to have as little bias as possible going into the case.

The idea that expertise necessarily produces bias (towards which side?) troubles me.

In this particular case, I agree with other commenters here that the general public should be fit to judge. But I'd rather see technical cases like Oracle vs. Google decided by experts.

We’re not attorneys or judges either, yet we all have an opinion on the law.

“Only in America”

Far from it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_system#The_jury_trial_in_v...

absolutely, shocking. The 'general' public are unlikely to grasp how complex this is and the future ramifications from their short and very limited time with the case.

What's shocking is your complete ignorance of how the legal system works.

I'm aware of how it works, i just don't think there should be a legal dispute for many of the 'patents' here is all.

I agree completely - the only way this trial could have been fair was if the jury shared your opinion instead of forming their own.

I think we really need a sarcasm html tag... honestly I have trouble determining which of these comments are serious.

Well thats not how the law works today,

What on earth are you talking about ?

Juries around the world are compromised of ordinary people.

The USA is unusual in having juries used for a broader spectrum of cases than other countries.

I agree that this particular type of case should not be decided by jury.

Not really true, in complex civil suits. Many countries use specialized, expert judges and courts to decide such matters.

Representative of the general public in US. Won't you say?

Yes. The argument being that for a highly technical issue it should be decided by a panel of experts, not the general public.

Nonsense. The issue in question was that Samsung copied Apple's design in an effort to fool regular customers into thinking they were buying Apple products. As such, it makes perfect sense to have the jury consist of those regular people.

You mean, like how patent applications are reviewed by government experts before a patent is granted?

Except that it's NOT a highly technical issue.

It's mainly a trade dress and UI look & feel issue. So the general public are absolutely the right people.

The case also covers some extremely technical patents.

True but it isn't central to the case.

The Samsung counterclaims really centered around the patent exhaustion issue. If the jury found that it did not apply in this case Apple would clearly have infringed.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com