What the Apple v Samsung verdict says about US jury trials
Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

What the Apple v Samsung verdict says about US jury trials

Following a $1 billion verdict for Apple on Friday, it is clear that brand reputation and the gut instincts of ordinary consumers are crucial to winning patent cases before US juries

Much of the verdict undoubtedly turned on brand reputation and perception, as well as the jury’s collective instinct, said Kevin Boully of Persuasion Strategies. “It’s going to come down to a consensus on their gut feeling about who’s in the right,” said Boully.

But US juries are also very patent friendly, even when it means they might have to pay more for new technology. “Two-thirds of the jury-eligible public believe that patents help competition,” Boully added.

Juries in Silicon Valley are also particularly IP-savvy, said Ronald Beaton of Trial Graphix. “The longer you live in [Silicon] Valley, the more you understand how important it is to protect innovation. It gets into your head.”

In this case, the jury foreman Velvin R Hogan was a 67-year old former engineer who owns a US patent. He was interviewed on Bloomberg television after the verdict.

Apple’s brand reputation as an innovation leader, coupled with possible unconscious bias against foreign companies, meant Samsung was probably doomed from the start. “Bias against foreign companies lurks beneath the surface,” said Boully. “It’s latent but you know it works on their motivations and would motivate them to raise pro-Apple arguments.”

In Korea, a court recently found that Apple and Samsung jointly infringed each other on some of the same technology that was at issue in the US case. Both companies were ordered to pay small amounts of damages.

But in the US, the jury’s verdict has sent a strong message to Apple’s competitors.

“This is a message that American jurors are not going to let flat copying happen, even if it helps their pocketbooks,” said Boully.

Check back with Managing IP for continuing analysis of this case.

You can also visit our dedicated page for additional background on this topic.

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

A team of lawyers who joined Norton Rose Fulbright from Polsinelli say they were drawn to the firm's global platform
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Lawyers say a ruling concerning liability for trademark infringement could give company directors an easy way out and create litigation uncertainty
The LMG Life Sciences Awards announces the winners for the 5th annual awards
Some US lawyers have strengthened their connections with European firms as they help clients determine whether the UPC will become a 'centre of gravity'
In the latest episode, the team discusses the battle to take control of listed company and IP business Qantm IP, and looks at some recent hiring trends
To mark Mental Health Awareness Week, lawyers explain how they manage their mental health, and how they pluck up the courage to ask themselves difficult questions
IP lawyers unpick a case heard at the CJEU’s Grand Chamber this week that could potentially create a new world for litigation in Europe
A lawyer who replied to a cease-and-desist letter with just two words has shown others how to deal with vexatious infringement allegations
The suggested rule change surrounding terminal disclaimers could ease the burden on defendants, but risks complicating prosecution strategies
Gift this article