Samsung/Apple Jury Foreman's Explanation For Verdict Shows He Doesn't Understand Prior Art
from the uh-oh dept
We had already noted what appeared to be serious problems with the way the jury decided the verdict in the Apple/Samsung case — including ignoring prior art, awarding damages on patents not infringed, and an admission of choosing punitive damages, despite instructions that clearly bar such an action. And it seems to only be getting worse. Groklaw points out that Velvin Hogan, the controversial jury foreman, went onto Bloomberg TV to defend himself, but only served to make things worse, by more or less admitting to not understanding how prior art works.
As was discussed in the previous post, the jury initially got hung up on the question of prior art on the first patent (7,469,381 — better known as the “bounceback patent” — covering how when you scroll and hit the edge of a “page” the screen “bounces back.”) However, in this interview, Hogan explains the “aha!” moment he had that led him to suggest to the jury that the prior art doesn’t apply:
The software on the Apple side could not be placed into the processor on the prior art and vice versa. That means they are not interchangeable. That changed everything right there.
You can see him say this in the video below, around the 3 minute mark:
Once again, we learn why it’s silly to have juries determining patent cases.