People grow attached to their phones, laptops and any other tech gadget they use on a daily basis. The makers of those gadgets certainly are protective over their creations, which is why Apple and Samsung have been duking it out over patent infringement allegations.
Apple sued Samsung more than a year and a half ago, and last week we received the newest revelation in the case. But first, a quick recap:
- Apple says that Samsung copied Apple’s innovative technology, along with user interfaces and product/packaging design.
- In August of 2012, Samsung was ordered to pay Apple $1.049 billion for copying intellectual property.
- The jury foreman in this case, Velvin Hogan, has a bit of explaining to do.
The biggest news to come out of this tug-of-war is that Apple has dropped the Samsung Galaxy S III Mini from the patent litigation – but there’s a catch. Apple drops the mini, as long as Samsung doesn’t sell it in the United States.
The mini Android smartphone was released in November 2012, and runs Android 4.1.1, otherwise known as Jelly Bean.
While Samsung definitely got a win here, that’s hardly the most interesting part of this lawsuit.
At the end of 2012, before the mini was dropped from the case…
… It seemed like Samsung was chasing a runaway jury to try and overturn, or at least modify, the jury’s August verdict.
The jury foreman is almost a too-good-to-be-true movie character, a 67-year-old man named Velvin Hogan, who even said that “besides my family, it (serving on this jury) was the high point of my career.”
Samsung listened closely to all the post-trial interviews Hogan gave, and even raised suspicion about how Hogan behaved during jury selection. Perhaps the most interesting twist is that Hogan did not disclose that he was involved in a breach of contract case 20 years ago with Seagate, his former employer.
What makes this remarkable is that Samsung sold a division to Seagate – which makes Samsung Seagate’s largest single shareholder.
Even more interesting? The attorney that sued Hogan on behalf of Seagate is married to a lawyer at the firm that is representing Samsung.While it is unlikely that Samsung will see any kind of overturned decision, this certainly adds another level of intrigue to this hard-worn tech battle.
This article was submitted by Sandy Matheson, an Apple aficionado and internet blogger for CenturyLink Internet.