Edit: I believe the judge fixed the most egregious errors, but post-verdict interviews with the jury make it seem like they were confused on various different fronts.
Here's one link describing some of those problems: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2012082510525390
>"And in example after example, when we put it to the test, the older prior art was just that. Not that there's anything [wrong] with older prior art - but the key was that the hardware was different, the software was an entirely different methodology, and the more modern software could not be loaded onto the older example and be run without error."
Wut.
> > Do you think if you hadn't been on the jury then we might have ended up with a very different verdict?
> I think so. But let's not say me specifically.