Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Nov 9, 2012, 11:05 PM   #26
MacDav
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by samcraig View Post
A fair trial is a fair trial.
Yeah, sounds good, but who gets to determine what is fair? Is that person or person's fair? How do you know when something is fair? What are the criteria to use? Who gets to choose the criteria and why? What I'm saying is life isn't fair, never has been and never will be. If and when you think it's fair, does that make it fair?

Last edited by balamw; Nov 10, 2012 at 07:56 AM. Reason: Fixed quote
MacDav is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 01:00 AM   #27
Oletros
macrumors 603
 
Oletros's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Premià de Mar
Quote:
Originally Posted by KeyDemo View Post
Perhaps you missed it:
http://www.macrumors.com/2012/10/26/...-site-samsung/

Indeed in review the judge didn't like how it was posted but actually Apple posted nearly the full text of the order.

http://www.macrumors.com/2012/11/01/...n-ipad-design/
Perhaps you missed it:

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1430.html

Why Apple was forced to change the text and why he has to pay ALL the legal costs to Samsung
Oletros is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 01:41 AM   #28
macsmurf
macrumors 65816
 
macsmurf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saladinos View Post
Not to mention the fact that he was asked about any litigation over the last 10 years and answered truthfully.

1993 was nearly 20 years ago. Nearly twice that time limit.
You are not telling the truth.

"THE COURT: Okay. Welcome back. Please take a seat. We had a few more departures in your absence. Let's continue with the questions. The next question is, have you or a family member or someone very close to you ever been involved in a lawsuit, either as a plaintiff, a defendant, or as a witness?"

Source: http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic....21002201632770

Last edited by macsmurf; Nov 10, 2012 at 02:04 AM.
macsmurf is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 03:03 AM   #29
token787
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
He was trying to get back at the company that messed him over but in the process scr**ed hisself once again.
token787 is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 05:27 AM   #30
macs4nw
macrumors 68020
 
macs4nw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: On Safari…..
Quote:
Originally Posted by JS82712 View Post
give it up samsung, you copied apple, it's a fact, and everyone knows it but you.
No, no, even THEY know it, but they just won't admit it. LOL
macs4nw is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 06:36 AM   #31
bradgfromboo
macrumors member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by macs4nw View Post
No, no, even THEY know it, but they just won't admit it. LOL
Ya Samsung uses rectangles..... its true.... but I see a whole lot more copying coming from apple here soon... notification bar, larger screens. They are already behind and will get lapped soon. 5 year old OSs don't impress people
bradgfromboo is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 06:46 AM   #32
macs4nw
macrumors 68020
 
macs4nw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: On Safari…..
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradgfromboo View Post
Ya Samsung uses rectangles..... its true.... but I see a whole lot more copying coming from apple here soon... notification bar, larger screens. They are already behind and will get lapped soon.
Admittedly, most companies do a little copying here and there, and APPLE is no exception.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bradgfromboo View Post
5 year old OSs don't impress people
Apparently, there are millions of fools out there, or more likely, millions of people disagree with you, and ARE impressed with APPLE's OS's.
macs4nw is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 07:19 AM   #33
samcraig
macrumors G5
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by macs4nw View Post
Admittedly, most companies do a little copying here and there, and APPLE is no exception.



Apparently, there are millions of fools out there, or more likely, millions of people disagree with you, and ARE impressed with APPLE's OS's.
My only rebuttal for that would be in the word impressed. That is more than accepts, enjoys, prefers, etc. Semantically speaking, of course. I can love my iPhone and not be impressed by it. I can be impressed by my iPhone and still not prefer it.
samcraig is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 08:16 AM   #34
MacFather
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Europe
Quote:
Originally Posted by JS82712 View Post
give it up samsung, you copied apple, it's a fact, and everyone knows it but you.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU
MacFather is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 08:21 AM   #35
anubis72
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Time for a Corporate-Sized Bitch Slap...

I like both companies. Call me simplistic (or missing the point altogether), but isn't this entire case over whether or not someone would "mistakenly" purchase one company's product over the other due to infringement on design copyrights? (Yes, there are things like loss of profits, blah blah blah--anyone involving themselves in this degree of legislature isn't hurting in the pocketbook, IMHO).

I hate to defend anyone in this case, but aren't there really a finite amount of designs one can incorporate into a phone design? If one works, why not base your designs off of it? Is someone expected to produce a triangular-shaped smartphone with a command prompt in place of a UI? (The bearded Linux elitists all have boners right now...)

Sorry but if someone isn't smart enough to read "Samsung" or see the Apple logo on a product, then maybe they shouldn't be buying a phone or any consumer products for that matter. I think the entire (OK, 99.99%?) judicial system revolves around protecting the incredibly retarded individuals who can't tell their ass from a hole in the ground. It's also ridiculous that people don't research a phone to know the differences either. Are you going to rely on the Wal-Mart employee to educate you on the differences between smartphones? Really? I say too ****ing bad. Wipe the drool off your chin and move along now...
anubis72 is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 08:22 AM   #36
SirLance99
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by JS82712 View Post
give it up samsung, you copied apple, it's a fact, and everyone knows it but you.
The rest of the world's courts disagree.
SirLance99 is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 08:54 AM   #37
johannar
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
No one can deny the fact that Samsung copied Apple a number of times but still Apple losing most cases
johannar is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 08:59 AM   #38
Mystic386
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
So I think the thread was about whether the foreman conducted himself properly. Just to bring us back to topic.

The reality is Samsungs lawyers should use anything possible to delay, stall, hold up, misdirect, raise doubt and win the case. That's what lawyers are about. Winning for their clients. They're not interested in who is right or wrong. That's the Judges job. Great lawyers play to win. Not to prove who is right in law.

So taking on the jury foreman because they think it could help makes sense.

Should the Jury Forman have kept quiet? Yes, probably. Ego maybe?

But does Seagate make him biased against Samsung... no. Apple use a fair bit of Seagate as well.

If Samsung can score off this it's worth the time and effort. But right now this is Judge directed it appears.

Lucy Koh seems to be doing a thorough job.

Should Samsung pay dearly. Yes absolutely. But this is not about what is right under law. It's about who can present the better argument.

Maybe Apple needs to look at the lawyers it hires.
Mystic386 is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 09:27 AM   #39
linuxcooldude
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by macsmurf View Post
You are not telling the truth.

"THE COURT: Okay. Welcome back. Please take a seat. We had a few more departures in your absence. Let's continue with the questions. The next question is, have you or a family member or someone very close to you ever been involved in a lawsuit, either as a plaintiff, a defendant, or as a witness?"

Source: http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic....21002201632770
He was indeed telling the truth. As a part of his jury instructions he was required to tell of any litigation he was a part of within the last 10 years. So any court cases hes ever been involved in within the last 10 years would apply.
__________________
Techshow:http://www.justin.tv/linuxcooldude
linuxcooldude is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 09:33 AM   #40
Oletros
macrumors 603
 
Oletros's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Premià de Mar
Quote:
Originally Posted by linuxcooldude View Post
He was indeed telling the truth. As a part of his jury instructions he was required to tell of any litigation he was a part of within the last 10 years. So any court cases hes ever been involved in within the last 10 years would apply.
Can you point where is said 10 years?
Oletros is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 09:41 AM   #41
linuxcooldude
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Its in the very article that he linked in his post.
__________________
Techshow:http://www.justin.tv/linuxcooldude
linuxcooldude is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 09:50 AM   #42
Oletros
macrumors 603
 
Oletros's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Premià de Mar
Quote:
Originally Posted by linuxcooldude View Post
Its in the very article that he linked in his post.
No, in the article says that Hogan said that the court asked him for trials in the last 10 years.

Can you point where in the trial transcriptions say 10 years?
Oletros is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 09:55 AM   #43
macsmurf
macrumors 65816
 
macsmurf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by linuxcooldude View Post
Its in the very article that he linked in his post.
No it isn't. The article says that Hogan explained that he was only asked about the last 10 years. The actual transcripts, however, tell a different story.
macsmurf is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 10:05 AM   #44
Rodimus Prime
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by JS82712 View Post
give it up samsung, you copied apple, it's a fact, and everyone knows it but you.
considering some of the key patents that apple won on have been declared invalid since the trail not so much any more. This means that the ruling could be completely over turned as it was one on invalid patents.
Rodimus Prime is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 10:05 AM   #45
linuxcooldude
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oletros View Post
No, in the article says that Hogan said that the court asked him for trials in the last 10 years.

Can you point where in the trial transcriptions say 10 years?
It was in the jury instructions. I believe the transcripts don't mention the 10 year limit when the judge asked the question. But either way I don't see how that matters. It was implied to the jury of the time limit when asking of any court cases in which they participated.

Putting the time limit in the jury instruction, then not adhering to that instruction is leading to jury confusion.

If that is the case, its not the fault of the jury but that of the courts and/or the judge.
__________________
Techshow:http://www.justin.tv/linuxcooldude
linuxcooldude is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 10:09 AM   #46
rocknblogger
macrumors 68000
 
rocknblogger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: New Jersey
Send a message via Skype™ to rocknblogger
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mystic386 View Post
So I think the thread was about whether the foreman conducted himself properly. Just to bring us back to topic.

The reality is Samsungs lawyers should use anything possible to delay, stall, hold up, misdirect, raise doubt and win the case. That's what lawyers are about. Winning for their clients. They're not interested in who is right or wrong. That's the Judges job. Great lawyers play to win. Not to prove who is right in law.

So taking on the jury foreman because they think it could help makes sense.

Should the Jury Forman have kept quiet? Yes, probably. Ego maybe?

But does Seagate make him biased against Samsung... no. Apple use a fair bit of Seagate as well.

If Samsung can score off this it's worth the time and effort. But right now this is Judge directed it appears.

Lucy Koh seems to be doing a thorough job.

Should Samsung pay dearly. Yes absolutely. But this is not about what is right under law. It's about who can present the better argument.

Maybe Apple needs to look at the lawyers it hires.
I agree that he may not be biased against Samsung but being involved in patent litigation himself can and I believe did influence his decisions. Taking it a step further, he was the jury foreman. He definitely had influence on the rest of the jurors and if his decision process was flawed or influenced due to his experiences regarding his personal patent litigation case then I think it's fair to say that him being on the jury had a direct influence on the final verdict.
__________________
Don't be stupid.
rocknblogger is online now   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 10:27 AM   #47
Oletros
macrumors 603
 
Oletros's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Premià de Mar
Quote:
Originally Posted by linuxcooldude View Post
It was in the jury instructions.
Where? You know that they still were not jurors so there was no jury instructions.

Are you saying that transcriptions are not complete?

Quote:
Originally Posted by linuxcooldude View Post
I believe the transcripts don't mention the 10 year limit when the judge asked the question. But either way I don't see how that matters. It was implied to the jury of the time limit when asking of any court cases in which they participated.
How it was implied if there was no mention of any time limit?
Oletros is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 10:32 AM   #48
nia820
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGrip View Post
Whether he conducted himself improperly or not, Samsung is still 100% guilty of ripping off Apple. And besides, he didn't do noting wrong anyways.
Apple has ripped off tons of other companies as well. It's kinda of like the pot calling the kettle black.
nia820 is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 10:37 AM   #49
linuxcooldude
macrumors 68000
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oletros View Post
Where? You know that they still were not jurors so there was no jury instructions.

Are you saying that transcriptions are not complete?



How it was implied if there was no mention of any time limit?
Prospective jurors, however you want to spin it. Transcripts only mentioned what was said during the trial, not necessarily what was read by them if they were written instructions for instance. More then likely there were some sort of paperwork each person had to read and sign that would not necessarily be recorded by transcripts.
__________________
Techshow:http://www.justin.tv/linuxcooldude

Last edited by linuxcooldude; Nov 10, 2012 at 10:44 AM.
linuxcooldude is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2012, 10:41 AM   #50
Oletros
macrumors 603
 
Oletros's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Premià de Mar
Quote:
Originally Posted by linuxcooldude View Post
Transcripts only mentioned what was said during the trial, not necessarily what was read by them if they were written instructions for instance.
Ah, you're only guessing, how surprising.

The fact is that the transcriptions don't say nothing about 10 years and the fact is that the question was totally clear, it didn't said any timeframe.
Oletros is offline   0 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Apple Responds to Samsung's Request for Information on Trial Jury Foreman MacRumors Mac Blog Discussion 33 Jan 16, 2013 01:07 AM
Jury Foreman in Apple vs. Samsung Case Speaks to Rationale for Verdict MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 400 Oct 3, 2012 07:41 PM
Jury Finds Largely in Favor of Apple in Apple vs. Samsung Trial, Awards More than $1 Billion in Damages MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 1383 Sep 5, 2012 03:46 PM
Proposed Jury Form for Apple v Samsung Trial kdarling Apple, Industry and Internet Discussion 4 Aug 15, 2012 12:49 PM
Judge dismisses jury trial for Apple and Motorola case kdarling Apple, Industry and Internet Discussion 1 Jun 8, 2012 09:41 AM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:40 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC