The text of the patents is specific. The fact that you see judgements like this implies that the interpretation (at least by this jury) is as broad as it seems to be. No where in that verdict do I see a narrow, careful reading of the technicalities of multitouch UIs. They got asked questions of the form "Did this device infringe?" and answered "Yup", almost without exception. Where exactly is the subtlety you're talking about?
I would recommend reading some patents. Most are far more specific than you realise.