Re:Apple versus Samsung: Jury foreman justifies $1bn verdict
by sbuk on Friday August 31, 2012 @08:55AM
(#4459440)
This is precisely what I'm talking about.
Some facts:
* The jury was selected by both sides.
* Having a patent does not preclude an individual from jury service, even if the case that is being sat is one that covers patent claims.
"he took his "knowledge" of the system and decided before the trial was complete" Pure emotive supposition on your part.
"It is about the only way to explain the speed of which they arrived at their decision." Not at all. This is an excellent example of cognitive bias. You disagree, for whatever reason, with the findings of the jury, so you rationalise your views and opinions based on this. To you, there simply is no rational explanation as to how Samsung lost. You invent constructs where the judge is corrupt or the jury is biased towards Apple, all based on extremely spurious conjecture. I'm not suggesting for one minute that Samsung were entirely wrong (I do believe that they crossed a line with the first implemetations of the Touchwiz UI and the early Galaxy handsets - Google told them as much), but to paint them as an entirely innocent and wronged party is unbelievably wide of the mark.
"Have you ever been in a group where one person is so obnoxious with their views you just want it over?" Yes. These boards. Everyday since the trial ended. It's getting like ground-hog day...
Some facts:
* The jury was selected by both sides.
* Having a patent does not preclude an individual from jury service, even if the case that is being sat is one that covers patent claims.
"he took his "knowledge" of the system and decided before the trial was complete" Pure emotive supposition on your part.
"It is about the only way to explain the speed of which they arrived at their decision." Not at all. This is an excellent example of cognitive bias. You disagree, for whatever reason, with the findings of the jury, so you rationalise your views and opinions based on this. To you, there simply is no rational explanation as to how Samsung lost. You invent constructs where the judge is corrupt or the jury is biased towards Apple, all based on extremely spurious conjecture. I'm not suggesting for one minute that Samsung were entirely wrong (I do believe that they crossed a line with the first implemetations of the Touchwiz UI and the early Galaxy handsets - Google told them as much), but to paint them as an entirely innocent and wronged party is unbelievably wide of the mark.
"Have you ever been in a group where one person is so obnoxious with their views you just want it over?" Yes. These boards. Everyday since the trial ended. It's getting like ground-hog day...