Because Samsung clearly wasn’t selling iPhone and iPad clones.

That is the way the system works, Mr. Pogson. Rather than having the issues settled by experts who likely have biases of their own, such as you have, they take unbiased people who are essentially ignorant and then the lawyers try to convince them on each side as to the way the facts, such as they are, should be viewed in light of the law, such as the judge explains and the jurors understand.

The process is not likely to result in a technically correct outcome in most cases and it is almost certain the the jurors are going to be swayed by completely specious information. You probably cheer when Microsoft is clobbered by a jury judgement against them, such as the billion dollar loss over using subroutines in a browser to process special file types or the algorithm used by Stac vs the one used by Microsoft, both companies having purchased rights to patents granted to others. Then you moan when the coin toss falls the other way. You have to learn to take the sweet with the sour, I think.

A better way certainly exists and would get rid of the patent annoyances that dominate today’s technologies, but you have to figure that the lawmakers are mostly lawyers and changing the system is mostly based on how their current system is flawed and that is not the way that they see it. Sounds sort of hopeless to me.