MacNN Forums (http://forums.macnn.com/)
-   Tech News (http://forums.macnn.com/tech-news/)
-   -   Samsung avoids lawsuit dismissal over evidence disclosure (http://forums.macnn.com/113/tech-news/490840/samsung-avoids-lawsuit-dismissal-over-evidence/)

 
NewsPoster Aug 2, 2012 10:13 PM
Samsung avoids lawsuit dismissal over evidence disclosure
Late Thursday, Judge Lucy Koh denied an Apple motion requesting the court <a href="http://macnn.com/rd/264031==http://www.electronista.com/articles/12/08/02/severe.misconduct.and.past.bad.behavior.over.desig n.patents/" rel='nofollow'>declare the iPhone manufacturer the victor</a> in the contentious smartphone patent trial currently underway in the US District Court of California. Apple's motion comes after Samsung appeared to have <a href="http://macnn.com/rd/264032==url" rel='nofollow'>publicly defied the judge's order</a> by publicly releasing excluded information that Apple allegedly copied Sony industrial design during the iPhone development process.<br><br><br>Apple's motion requested Judge Koh to award Apple a victory in the design patents aspect of the trial based on continued Samsung misconduct. It argues that Samsung's "continuing and escalating misconduct merits a severe penalty that will establish that Samsung is not above the law." Apple says Samsung's release of the data was an attempt to sway the jury outside the courtroom on the design patent issues.

Samsung countered that Apple's request would derail the judicial process and was "an affront to the integrity of the jury." Senior Quinn Emanuel partner and lead Samsung attorney John Quinn admitted <a href="http://macnn.com/rd/264033==http://www.electronista.com/articles/12/08/01/response.to.judges.order.for.explanation/" rel='nofollow'>admitted authorizing the release</a> but claimed it was sent only to media outlets that requested it, a point that has seen some dispute by the press agencies that received the information.

Judge Koh has not excluded the possibility of sanctions or further jury instructions regarding Samsung's misconduct in granting Samsung's motion to strike, however. The trial resumes Friday afternoon, with Apple Vice President Phil Schiller taking the stand.


<a title="View Apple Response to Samsung leaked evidence on Scribd" href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/101856200/Apple-Response-to-Samsung-leaked-evidence" style="margin: 12px auto 6px auto; font-family: Helvetica,Arial,Sans-serif; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 14px; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; -x-system-font: none; display: block; text-decoration: underline;">Apple Response to Samsung leaked evidence</a><iframe class="scribd_iframe_embed" src="http://www.scribd.com/embeds/101856200/content?start_page=1&view_mode=list&access_key=key-ri3u3ckc46oiga8trhq" data-auto-height="true" data-aspect-ratio="0.772727272727273" scrolling="no" id="doc_58641" width="100%" height="600" frameborder="0"></iframe>
 
UmarOMC Aug 3, 2012 12:55 AM
I still want a Galaxy SIII!!!
 
Inkling Aug 3, 2012 06:58 AM
If the tech press were following Groklaw, they'd know that there was no chance the judge would sanction Samsung because, despite Apple's nasty rhetoric, Samsung had done nothing wrong. The material in question was already publicly available and most of it had already been published. And the judge had issued no formal order banning its release, she'd even called at one time for an open trial. The real issue was the embarrassment the release poses for the judge. It shows that's she's permitting information favorable to Apple to go to the jury while blocking that favorable to Samsung.

In short, Samsung made what's actually a very clever move both to protect its own reputation, and to set this case up for appeal. When you've got a biased judge, the smart move is to do things that set the judge off.

You can find Groklaw at:

http://www.groklaw.net

This is a bit like the Google Book Settlement, where the tech press repeated Google's deceptive press releases until the entire settlement began to fall apart and was rejected by the judge. Except in this case, the tech press is echoing Apple rather than Google.

Follow Groklaw if you want to understand this dispute. Ignore tech news sources.

Personally, I wonder why Apple's lawyers are behaving like such stupid thugs. Is it them or is all this nastiness Steve Jobs dying wish? A device almost identical to the iPad was in the movie 2001 long ago. Samsung really did have iPhone-like designs before the iPhone, and Apple really did consciously copy Sony's iPhone-like design.
 
SockRolid Aug 3, 2012 09:26 AM
@ inkling re: "Samsung really did have iPhone-like designs before the iPhone, and Apple really did consciously copy Sony's iPhone-like design."

All of which were inspired by iPod. Maybe Samsung should hire you for the appeal. But good luck trying to find a sympathetic judge. Samsung would need to offer him or her a few million US dollars first though.
 
blahblahbber Aug 3, 2012 01:20 PM
Quote, Originally Posted by SockRolid (Post 4181653)
@ inkling re: "Samsung really did have iPhone-like designs before the iPhone, and Apple really did consciously copy Sony's iPhone-like design."
All of which were inspired by iPod. Maybe Samsung should hire you for the appeal. But good luck trying to find a sympathetic judge. Samsung would need to offer him or her a few million US dollars first though.
And the iPod was designed by someone else, not designed by Apple, no in-house inspiration... So what's your point?
 
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:35 PM.

Copyright © 2005-2007 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.


Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2