Apple vs. Samsung: Second Interview With Jury Foreman Worse Than the First & More

[dgstorm]

The Apple vs. Samsung case... it's like a bad wreck that you don't really want to see, but you can't tear yourself away from. You rubberneck just to see what new gruesome body part is visible, and when you do, you are disgusted all over again.

That's exactly what we have here today. Apparently, the jury foreman, Velvin Hogan, on the Apple vs. Samsung case has been opening his mouth again, and jamming his foot further down his throat. He was strangely willing to sit down for an online interview with Gizmodo, and here are just a couple of bits of swill that spilled out of his mouth.

Demon-Xanth: Did you have the opportunity to ask “Is this something that should be patentable?” during the trial?

Velvin Hogan: @Demon-Xanth – No, however it was not the function of this jury to ask that. We were bound to use the law as it is today. The patents were issued the judge instructed us not to second guess the current patent system.

Guess what though? Determining whether something was patentable was precisely one of the duties that the jury was responsible for, and was expected of them. It makes you wonder if any of them even bothered to read the jury instructions.

Here's an exchange where Mr. Hogan was questioned about prior art. His response was nonsensical, and he was called out on it.

Wanhang: Why did you choose to ignore prior art despite it being a legitimate claim?

Velvin Hogan: @Wanhang – I is not ignore prior art yes it was legitimate, however it was not interchangeable therefore it did not invalidate Apples patents….Under the current law the prior art must be among other things interchangeable. the prior art sighted even Samsung does not currently use. Read the law and the statues covering Prior art.

Firewheels: @Velvin Hogan – You’re suggesting, then, that the patent is on the particular implementation, not the overall concept? In that case, isn’t it clear that in many of the patents no infringement is possible, as clearly an implementation in Java (Android) is distinct from an implementation in Objective-C (iOS)?

If, however, you’re suggesting the patent is on the concept, then clearly there IS prior art, and therefore the patents are invalid. Either way, Samsung should not have been charged the exorbitant punitive damages you clearly believed were due.

When it comes to criminal lawsuits, a jury trial makes perfect sense. When it comes to patent lawsuits, it makes no sense whatsoever. In many ways, I feel sorry for Mr. Hogan and the jury. These folks were expected to determine one of the most important cases in the history of tech, and they don't really understand patent law or technology properly. We really need experts determining the outcome of trials like this one. Experts in patent law, and experts in technology. Ah well, even though his statements are likely inadmissible, perhaps the appellate judges will figure this stuff out on their own, and set things right for Samsung in the long run.

Sidenote: Oh, and btw... just to give you guys a heads up. Now that Apple is emboldened by their success, they will be amending their ban-request lawsuit to include the Samsung Galaxy S III and the OG Galaxy Note as well. ~ MobileBloom

Source: Phandroid

 

[armeddroid]

SMH.
The ignorance with this guy is astounding and the iSheep that follow and cheer for him are no different.
Its quite obvious that this jury screwed the whole thing up and the US people dont even realize how badly Apple abused the patent system for their victory.
Wonder if someone is backing up Apple behind the veil.

 

[frankiez]

I wonder if part of determining who was to sit on the jury was what brand of cellphone or tech products they currently use. Curious as to how it was determined cuz from my experience Apple consumers are very pro-Apple and everything else is garbage. OTOH, those that arent hate Apple and would love to see them crumble.

 

[armeddroid]

I wonder if part of determining who was to sit on the jury was what brand of cellphone or tech products they currently use. Curious as to how it was determined cuz from my experience Apple consumers are very pro-Apple and everything else is garbage. OTOH, those that arent hate Apple and would love to see them crumble.

I do know that one of the jurors was unemployed but was a hard core gamer.
Wonder what motiviated his side to go with Apple.

 

[kodiak799]

I do know that one of the jurors was unemployed but was a hard core gamer.
Wonder what motiviated his side to go with Apple.

I'm sure a few were easily influenced after what had to be an absolute snoozefest.

One of the reasons lawyers don't like overly intelligent or dominant personalities on juries is their ability to influence other jurors. You don't want that, you want YOUR words to influence the jury. And it sounds like some garage hack with a couple of patents drove the jury as an "expert".

Based on everything I've read, Samsung lost that case in jury selection.

 

[armeddroid]

I'm sure a few were easily influenced after what had to be an absolute snoozefest.

One of the reasons lawyers don't like overly intelligent or dominant personalities on juries is their ability to influence other jurors. You don't want that, you want YOUR words to influence the jury. And it sounds like some garage hack with a couple of patents drove the jury as an "expert".

Based on everything I've read, Samsung lost that case in jury selection.

Agreed.
I also am curious about the article about where the jury had so many inconsistencies on many of the infringements.
Hopefully this will be noted and used on the next case in Dec.

 

[B0B0]

it's a trainwreck.... jesus krist.

 

[Narsil]

As I said before the trial ended, I'd have given my left nut to be on that jury.

Except that I cannot think of anything that would convince me to live in Commifornia.

 

[JohnnytheK]

As I said before the trial ended, I'd have given my left nut to be on that jury.

Except that I cannot think of anything that would convince me to live in Commifornia.

Ouch! Think how we feel out here on the left coast.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[liftedplane]

God I wish there could have been someone there that had caused a hung jury, I'd of made absolutely sure that apple wouldn't have won and I've have never sided with any of them. If only they had one person there that did that.

this guy, what he wrote, it makes no sense. Guess we'll see what happens

 

[ambrown]

If Velvin Hogan knew what was good for him he would steer clear of the media entirely. But all this does is prove there were some personal biases that he, himself, entertained when making his decision. Remember, Velvin Hogan is the engineer that had someone else infringe on HIS patents and he took them to court and lost. His big "Aha moment" that everyone published he said he "could defend this, if it was (his) patent" and thus put out his own opinions plainly. He was trying to "defend" Apple to the rest of the jury, who were divided on opinions. And when asked in one of his many interviews did the jury try to go against the Judge's orders to only award for damages, not for punishment he stated that they wanted to give Samsung "more than a slap on the wrist" he defended it by saying that it wasn't a punishment. Well the whole line about "paying for" infringement sure sounds like a punishment to me.

Now this little beauty of a blunder. This guy just doesn't know when to stop. The more he opens his mouth the more he reveals about 1) his own biases that clearly influenced his decision, and thus the rest of the jury as well, and 2) that he really has no clue what he was talking about at any point in the timeline of this case, or post-case for that matter.

I wish I could have been on the jury (though not really because I'm biased myself) so I could have ripped this guy's logic to shreds. I'm no patent lawyer, or otherwise "qualified" to comment on legal matters or such, but it's clear to me that this guy had it in his mind that infringers should have to "pay for it" and has a deep sense of victimization due to what happened to him in his own legal fight. Then enabling this guy to get the "justice" that he was denied in his own circumstance and somehow by proxy exact his revenge is pitiful at best. So if Velvin Hogan wants to maintain his dignity he should bow out while he still has a chance (though it's arguably far too late for that).

 

[jseah]

God I wish there could have been someone there that had caused a hung jury, I'd of made absolutely sure that apple wouldn't have won and I've have never sided with any of them. If only they had one person there that did that.

this guy, what he wrote, it makes no sense. Guess we'll see what happens

FWIW, this is a civil case, not a criminal case. In a civil case, you don't need to have every jury member agree. It is only with criminal cases where the decision needs to be unanimous.

 

[jseah]

I wonder if part of determining who was to sit on the jury was what brand of cellphone or tech products they currently use. Curious as to how it was determined cuz from my experience Apple consumers are very pro-Apple and everything else is garbage. OTOH, those that arent hate Apple and would love to see them crumble.

From his first interview, he said that no one on the jury owned an iPhone.

 

[ambrown]

Here's another take on this Gizmodo blunder by Groklaw:

Groklaw - Apple v Samsung Foreman Gets More Things Wrong ~pj

 

[94lt1]

Lol, lots if people lie to get into, and out of jury duty.. all I'm saying.