How? A jury that exercise jury nullification _are_ explicitly ignoring the law and the judges instructions. That is the very foundation of the concept.
Nullification is possible only because a jury does not have to logically justify their decisions, and in some jurisdictions (such as the US) can not be overturned at all in the case of not guilty decisions in a criminal trial.
That does not change whether or not jury misconduct may have occurred. It only means that the court and the prosecution is left with limited power to prevent it and, such as in the US, with no recourse if it happens in a criminal trial.
My thoughts were that if Samsung can successfully argue jury misconduct based on the deliberations inside the jury room, then any future verdict based on the doctrine of jury nullification can be similarly argued as 'misconduct' by the losing party.
In the case of a US criminal trial, where nullification usually happens, it is irrelevant as the prosecution can not appeal an acquittal.
But even in the case of a civil trial such as this, the only reason Samsung can argue jury misconduct is because members of the jury themselves have provided evidence by talking to the press. Even then, the barrier to getting a retrial are high.
Nullification as a concept is not protected other than as a byproduct of other concepts, such as the privacy of the jury deliberations, and the strength it gets from the protection against appeals of acquittals in criminal trials.
As such, Samsungs argument has absolutely zero bearing on the concept of jury nullifications - their arguments are based on the letter of the law and mountains of precedents setting the boundaries of exactly the extents to which the jury's decision can be question or set aside.
Nullification is possible only because a jury does not have to logically justify their decisions, and in some jurisdictions (such as the US) can not be overturned at all in the case of not guilty decisions in a criminal trial.
That does not change whether or not jury misconduct may have occurred. It only means that the court and the prosecution is left with limited power to prevent it and, such as in the US, with no recourse if it happens in a criminal trial.