So, from what I gather:
1. The jury finished their deliberations in 21 hours.
2. They had to answer 700 questions, leaving them with 2 minutes per question.
3. The jury foreman was a patent holder who heavily influenced their decisions on some of the questions. There are some indications of heavy biases, but they appear to be exaggerated.
4. Some have speculated that the jury were biased because Samsung is a foreign company, Apple is an American company, and their headquarters was in close proximity. I don't buy this myself. Though it probably had some
effect, I believe the problem lied elsewhere.
5. Groklaw has now posted an article
that lists some inconsistencies in the answers as well as the comments of one juror. Keep in mind that Groklaw are heavily biased towards free and open source software, just like I am.
That was an interesting article, It kinda reiterates what I was saying before, Apple has a very positive public Image, and are seen as "The good guys" the fact that the company is American helps as well. Alot of people think Apple is some kind of utopiac corporation, I think some of these jurors didn't want to "hurt" Apple. Plus the Juror stating that they wanted to deliver more than a slap on the wrist but not be "too unreasonable" is in direct conflict with what the instructions on the jury form stated. It can only help samsung for the jury to keep talking. I really think this is going to blow up in apples face as more things come to light in how the jury reached their decision. I think there was some bias. I think they should have asked "what kind of cellphone do you have?" in the prescreening. If a Juror said "Iphone" or "Android" then they should have had to answer a question of "what led you to purchase this particular phone?"