I thought people might be interested to see this interview with one of the jurors from the Apple/Samsung case
- Crucial evidence = memos from Samsung/Google meeting where Samsung decided they didn't care that their products were similar to Apple's (personally I find it hard to believe that this shows an intent to infringe rather than just a wilful negligence...)
- Prior art was irrelevant since you can't load Android onto Samsung's old smartphones
- Samsung's claims against Apple not upholdable since they used different processors
- He thinks the verdict would be different if he wasn't on the jury
- Admits they "set the bar rather high", could encourage further litigation, claimed their verdict was "following the rules"
- Thinks there are no wider implications, no harm to conusmers
- Apple gained no "home advantage"
So yeah... does very little to reinforce my faith in either the US legal system or modern IP law/patent systems.
We all know who to thank in a decade time when we have an innovationless monoculture of a technology industry.