[vesky]

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...

[mbreese]

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

[vesky]

Honest answer: I would.

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

[wklauss]

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.

[taligent]

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.

[lubos]

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.