That may be the case, but the judge has reaffirmed her decision at least three times already. Going back and asking the judge another time isn't going to change the answer. The place to complain about it is the appellate court if Samsung loses, and that's where Samsung should make its argument.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Requests Sanctions Against Samsung Delivering Default Victory in Design Patent Case
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That may be the case, but the judge has reaffirmed her decision at least three times already. Going back and asking the judge another time isn't going to change the answer. The place to complain about it is the appellate court if Samsung loses, and that's where Samsung should make its argument.
More FUD from the peanut gallery.
Android was in development long before anyone knew of Apple's plans for a smartphone OS.
Schmidt has NEVER been accused by anyone, include Steve Jobs, of stealing ideas from Apple and bringing them to Google.
I'm not missing anything. Have you ever been on a Jury? I have. A few times. Serious cases. And they hammer you with how important it is to not be exposed to media. Everyday they ask you if you have heard or discussed the trial with anyone - even other jurors. Is it the honor system - yes. And I can't say what most people would do. But on 2 of the trials I served jury on - jurors excused themselves because they had either accidentally been exposed to a conversation or media - or had ignored the "rules" and read a paper. In one of the cases, the Judge asked if the paper had any stories about the trial and or if he had read any about the trial. He had not. He was excused anyway.
CAN a jury get tainted. I'm not going to say no. Nor that it never happens.
And yes - I broke my own cardinal rule by not prefacing my statement with what I believe Samsung is doing. I apologize for that. And I never said it was right what they did either. I merely gave an explanation on what I thought was the reason wasn't.
That's my point. As in any other case involving patents, trade secrets, IP issues and the like, no one but Apple and Samsung actually know what the details of the case are. What makes it into the various web sites, newspapers, and other media is carefully manipulated info to serve the respective party and put them in a good light.
This thing sure is going to go on for awhile...
Hope some money is left over for some new products.
Hope some money is left over for some new products.
Apple gets a freeroll. Can't lose now.
Freeroll (noun) - In playing a particular hand of poker, a freeroll is a situation that arises (usually when only two players remain) before the last card has been dealt, in which one player is guaranteed to at least split the pot with his opponent no matter what the final cards are, but where there is some chance he can win the whole pot if certain final cards are dealt. (courtesy of Wikipedia)
Now, even if Apple loses (and even if Judge Koh doesn't summarily rule against Samsung for contempt of court) Apple can request a mistrial, which would likely be granted. I wonder if there are any other catastrophic mistakes that the Samsung legal team can discover and execute...
Freeroll (noun) - In playing a particular hand of poker, a freeroll is a situation that arises (usually when only two players remain) before the last card has been dealt, in which one player is guaranteed to at least split the pot with his opponent no matter what the final cards are, but where there is some chance he can win the whole pot if certain final cards are dealt. (courtesy of Wikipedia)
Now, even if Apple loses (and even if Judge Koh doesn't summarily rule against Samsung for contempt of court) Apple can request a mistrial, which would likely be granted. I wonder if there are any other catastrophic mistakes that the Samsung legal team can discover and execute...
And the development of Android took a drastic turn down Ripoff Road when iPhone was announced. Here's a shot of an Android phone just before iPhone was announced publicly:
Don't try to tell us (or anybody else for that matter) that Google, with Eric Schmidt's help, didn't directly copy iPhone and iOS. You'll only sound like a pathetic phandroid. Be strong. Be brave. Admit the copying.
You can do it. Admit. That. Google. Copied.
GOOD BOY!
Not yet anyway. All things in time. The courtroom drama has just barely begun.
But, in case you have already forgotten, Schmidt was excluded from any and all Apple board discussions of the iPad. And that would explain why Android simply hasn't made a dent in the pad computing market. No insider information. No industrial espionage. Good luck trying to catch up, Google.
You do realize that if there's a mistrial, then Samsung will be able to introduce the timeline for the F700 in the new trial, don't you?
A mistrial would seem to benefit Samsung much more than Apple....
Fascinating. EVERYONE in this thread should read that article before posting another response.
As you said, the Samsung lawyer used Judge Koh's own orders in his reply:
Moreover, he pointed out that Apple themselves had already released some of the documents to the public.
Even more interesting is the evidence in the Exhibits in that article. They not only include the already publicized Samsung F700 concepts and the Apple Sony concept, but also include the part of the Apple employee interview where he says that the metal banded Sony concept led them away from their previous extruded side concepts.
He said it made Apple decide to use the "Sony-ish" (his word) edge design in their own product. In other words, Apple did what they thought Sony would do.
The funniest thing about your post is that you clearly have no idea what this trial is about. Google is not on trial. Neither is Eric Schmidt. So your post is just flame bait. And incredibly erroneous at that.
Now don't you feel extra smart?
Now don't you feel extra smart?
Why is everyone obsessed with shown the same picture of Google's DEVELOPMENT phone for Android? I do wonder, you may as well state it was the first Android handset to ever hit the market as it's just as much a stupid and pointless comment, I wonder if I can find an early development iPhone picture, probably not but I bet it looked like a screen stuck on a circuit board.
It's actually pretty funny because the screen on the development Android phone looks more advanced and different then the pretty grid pattern from Symbian and Windows Mobile the first iOS copied for the home screen..
----------
Or other words...... APPLE COPIED SONY! If you use Apple's lines of thought on what copying is in it's court proceedings.
Because most people here have never been involved with R&D of a new device.
In Google's case, they used an HTC Windows Mobile phone since it was available for development. (That's the photo he posted.)
I would bet that you're probably right. We also know that for secrecy, Apple software engineers didn't get to see the iPhone itself, but only a screen put on the outside of a box.
As an example of device evolution, here's a picture of the very first Windows Mobile Phone prototype from the turn of the century:
Good lord not that test phone picture again... it was one of several devices. There was touch device as well. People here seem to get amnesia every time they try and make the same tired argument.
You obviously have no clue what Android is.
As for Schmidt, HE excluded himself from ALL meetings regarding the iPhone. He had to as there was a clear conflict of interest.
So to accuse a former member of Apple's board of industrial espionage without any supporting evidence is absurd.
Apple would have sued is butt off years ago if they had evidence to support that. And given Jobs' hatred of Android, you know he would have made the claim and filed the paperwork himself if it were true.
Gotcha! I thought you were agreeing with and believing the article in the link. My bad.
Funny that you mention it like that if we assume that Apple got scolded in europe and will likely be forced to publically state through a PR campaign that their hate campaign against Samsung copying their design was untrue.
I personally consider that the much worse form of impacting the jury as apple has invested an undisclosed amount of money to bias every single media-connected person directly or indirectly.
Samsung as it seems simply wants to even the playing field a bit so they stand a chance to get a critical, unbiased jury, not a 'rotten dozen of apple fanboys'
oh boy, let's totally disregard Android existed before Schmidt joined the Apple BOD (hell it existed before Google purchased it) and that Andy Rubin the creator of Android (well one of them) had worked on DangerOS
PJ has never hidden her own opinions and bias about parties. It doesn't mean her reporting, document transcriptions and other analysis by our contributors isn't objective.
By your token, all her reporting on SCO was highly biased for IBM/Novell. While she never hid her apprehension for SCO, she always remained objective in her analysis, no matter how much her opponents don't want it to be true.
This is quite unlike Mueller and his hidden agenda, his highly erroneous statements and lack of proper understanding of what he's talking about (how often has he claimed evidence to be "the smoking gun" or the "end of Google" only for it to be completely irrelevant in the end ?).
Excuse me. So Samsung tries to submit evidence well past the deadline, most likely to make sure that Apple has no time to respond in court. And if the evidence was any good, then they would have submitted it in time, unless their lawyers are total morons. Then they are told that this evidence cannot be submitted. Then they have the audacity to go against what the judge tells them and publish all this so-called evidence as widely as possible. And all this makes Apple look desperate.
Exactly, giving evidence after the deadline would not give Apple time enough to prepare a proper defense, possibly why the evidence was not allowed. Now, I'm not sure if this applies to patent lawsuits but I was thinking the same thing.
Or maybe it was simply an honest problem that the F700 info wasn't discovered in time for the deadline. These are big companies with many employees and many projects - and finding some stuff from 5 or more years ago can take some time.
It's a sad comment on the legal system that some powerful evidence is hidden because of a technicality.
On the other hand, Microsoft did very well by annoying the "monopoly trial" judge into making numerous errors in that case.
If you're dealing with a judge who seems to be biased, going for a mistrial is a great game plan. (...and Koh seems to be quite an Apple fanboy....)
No but it is setting up a easy case for an appeal. The judge should of known that he was handing samsung a slam dunk appeal. Samsung wins they walk away Apple looses more crapents. Samsung losses it gets appealed.
The judge seems very bais.
Regardless if it was legal tactic or just a mistake about the evidence, court procedures still apply.
Semantics won't work either, such as you described.
Oh Snap! Now the Cellphone Piñata is filing its own case against Apple and Samsung. Their chief complaint is both phone companies primary phones (iPhone 4S and Samsung Galaxy S III) are "Too Festive in their naming schemes and simple brick style," which violates Cellphone Piñata's "Fiesta Trade Dress Patent!" Not to mention both the Android and iOS App Icons look to much like the Cellphone Piñata's Numeros OS software, which violate other patents.
When will all of these lawsuits end?
When will all of these lawsuits end?