$1 Billion is serious money. But more than that, that trial showed the problem with giving responsibility to random juries with little appreciation for what it takes to build a successful business or appreciation for the nature of technology.

Maybe in a village of a hundred people a jury of your peers knows you and has decent perspective, for gigantic companies these juries do not constitute a jury of peers who share any meaningfully similar understanding that would help them make decisions.

On top of that, juries are practically paid minimum wage.

In terms of hack-ish fixes:

  1. A big company can afford to contribute more to trial costs. Have them contribute equally to paying jurors a lot more so that they have reason to be serious.
  2. If the lawyers are fairly sure that the people on the jury have insufficient understanding of a subject to be able to make meaningful decisions at all – they should have the right to pay for and demand the education of those jurors in relevant matters, and prove competent understanding before they can actually help in the trial. That will also give the jurors to gain from their experience on the juries.

Now that may sound ridiculous but a billion dollar judgment in those circumstances was also ridiculous. Our legal system creates plenty of injustices. People should at least have the right to pay themselves to reduce the chances of blatant miscarriages of justice.

Every mistake costs the country something. And lots of big mistakes just accumulate into a gigantic headache.