> I fail to understand how HN and the court system do not think the same against Apple
"The court system" is not a collective entity with a shared set of thoughts. Different judges, different arguments, in one case (but not the other) a jury, these things make a difference.
The appellate process and the system of binding precedent goes with it serves to somewhat make things more consistent overall than individual trial court processes would when considered over a longer time and a larger number of cases, but cases very close in time ending up with different trial court decisions despite broadly similar fact patterns are not really surprising.
"The court system" is not a collective entity with a shared set of thoughts. Different judges, different arguments, in one case (but not the other) a jury, these things make a difference.
The appellate process and the system of binding precedent goes with it serves to somewhat make things more consistent overall than individual trial court processes would when considered over a longer time and a larger number of cases, but cases very close in time ending up with different trial court decisions despite broadly similar fact patterns are not really surprising.