It seems pretty clear at this point that the jury miscalculated the damages. I wasn't clear myself whether the 3.5% for the past 14 months would be added or not. Anyone who was in that courtroom left confused and had only what we were given at that moment. I believe the question the jury asked the court earlier in the day was equally misunderstood by the Judge. I do think that Judge Jackson realizes this mistake and despite what some on this board are saying about him I found him to be very fair in the courtroom. I believe he will fix this as it is not just and is not in keeping with the evidence presented in the courtroom. Everyone who is long here has something riding on the court getting this right but screaming louder and calling folks names won't get it done. Have a little patience and I believe we will all be rewarded.
First of all thanks again for your lights on this case... Jury certainly was confused and Judge couldn´t clarify on their question. They probabaly have unclear paperwork which is lacking time frame indications: From date-to date for past damages ... Start date for running royalities...I am sure the laches issue blurred the "past" issue ...
Hopefully this can be corrected. Should be very easy to calculate -
Just add the royalties they awarded for the "past period" to the damage amount, because that was actually their original question: Will royalties be on top of damages ?
yeah everyone misunderstood everyone - the judge didnt understand the jury question. the 9 jurors misinterpreted what the judge said, then all miscalculated. and then the vrng lawyers didnt bother to complain. so show us exactly how they came up with 15.7mm and how it was a miscalculation
vrngisdead you are right. Nobody in the courtroom understand anything because we have incompitent people in our society. This board however explain what the judge should do after his ruling.
I wonder why people on this board trying to put a lip stick on a pig. It still be a pig. We lost, maybe because another typo, but the judge ruled and I don't think he will reverse any decision no matter how dumb our legal system makes it look itself and the jury.
Case closed google one. Because 15million dollar for google is less then a penny for you or me.
Interesting, because I sliced it every way possible, earlier today, and could not for the life of me reproduce anything in the neighborhood of the verdict, even briefly thought a zero was missing. I put my faith in royalties to bring balance to the equation, but it would be a nice bonus to see a revised damages settlement tomorrow. What an exciting ride thus far!
They had a table of damages which was ALREADY SET at 3.5% royalties for all the 6 years
of past damages
The only thing they had to do was to calculate 35% for each defendants
since the last 13.5 months of revenues (Sept 15 2011- Nov 06 2012) are exactly 35.0%
of all those 6 years. (you need another table to come up with that 35% but that's correct, believe
google-$451.1M 35% = 158M (jury error 15.8)
aol-$22.7M 35% = 7.9M correct
IAC-$18.9M 35% = 6.6M correct
target-$282k 35% = 98K correct
Gannet-$12k 35% = 4K correct
For Google they used 3.5% not 35%....
that's the error...
GOOG damages 158M not 15.8M, total damages 173M not 30M