Phil Schiller, Scott Forstall May Testify in Apple v. Samsung Damages Retrial

[KPOM]

What is he thinking?! I would not help after getting fired!

It probably isn't under his control. He can be subpoeanaed. In any case, he got a nice severance package and I think is technically still a "consultant" (i.e. on a paid leave until he doesn't have any more insider knowledge that a competitor can use) and so has contractual obligations to Apple.

On a personal level, Samsung was found to have copied "his" ideas (iOS was under his control at the time) so he may want to see them lose.

 

[Macinva]

how do you actually manage to get first comment majority of the time?

Either way, i have to agree. I think he should stick the two fingers up to apple like they did to him.

f5 - f5 - f5 - f5 - f5 - f5 - omg new article!

 

[springsup]

What is he thinking?! I would not help after getting fired!

This kind of thing happens all the time; former employees are often required to testify in court regarding work they did.

It would be the height of unprofessionalism to refuse to participate. The court may also have the power to subpoena him if he does not willingly testify, or there may be clauses in his contract which say that he has to testify in court if required. Those clauses would still have legal effect, even though he no longer works at Apple, and Apple could sue him if he fails to honour them. It all depends on the circumstances of the case and why they need him to testify.

That said, it's easy enough to do so I can't imagine he wouldn't. He probably wouldn't even need to personally appear in court (unless perhaps he's a named inventor of some of the patents), and he'd be compensated for his time.

 

[Dr McKay]

Is this where he testifies Pro-Apple, turn around with a nervous smile at Tim Cook sat behind him.

"Scott did good?"

Tim then lets Scott eat a Dog Biscuit out of his hand and strokes his hair while he chews.

"That'll do Scott... That'll do"

 

[KPOM]

I haven't heard about forstall since he was ousted. What's he doing these days anyways?

Nothing. The "special advisor" role is basically because California doesn't respect non-compete agreements. By keeping him on their payroll they prevent him from going to a competitor. I think it runs out at the end of the year, so we'll likely see him turn up somewhere else then. Perhaps even Microsoft, depending on who the new CEO is, but more likely at a startup where he can be the CEO.

 

[gnasher729]

What is he thinking?! I would not help after getting fired!

He's a witness in a court case. The truth and nothing but the truth and all that stuff.

----------

Just stop. It's really not a question of who started what. Let the litigation take place and let the chips fall where they may and everyone will just need to get over it.

Huh? That's what the whole case is about - Samsung copied and lost the court case. And it's not a matter of "who started" - Apple didn't copy anything.

 

[blackhand1001]

Nothing. The "special advisor" role is basically because California doesn't respect non-compete agreements. By keeping him on their payroll they prevent him from going to a competitor. I think it runs out at the end of the year, so we'll likely see him turn up somewhere else then. Perhaps even Microsoft, depending on who the new CEO is, but more likely at a startup where he can be the CEO.

I don't think he would fit in at Microsoft considering they are like epitome of the opposite of his design philosophy.

 

[louis Fashion]

sue me sue you blues

I would not count on seeing any of the 600B soon. The lawyers will kick that can down the road until the end of time.

 

[3282868]

To be fair, Samsung started it by blatantly copying Apple.

Oh I was joking that Forstall would "get revenge" on Apple by conveniently forgetting key testimony

 

[MacLawyer]

Uh, oh!

 

[applelover1016]

Scott, is that you?

Lol i kinda sensed that too

 

[samcraig]

He's a witness in a court case. The truth and nothing but the truth and all that stuff.

----------



Huh? That's what the whole case is about - Samsung copied and lost the court case. And it's not a matter of "who started" - Apple didn't copy anything.

I'm not furthering a ridiculous conversation. My comment stands.

 

[xNYMetsx]

Do whatever you must to hurt Samsung.

 

[Treq]

You don't really get fired at that level of the game. You get a golden parachute and leave to appease shareholders basically

Well, after the flat look of iOS 7, I'm sure there are plenty of share holders who wish he never left.
But I'm sure he will testify honestly about the subject at hand.

 

[lolkthxbai]

Just stop. It's really not a question of who started what. Let the litigation take place and let the chips fall where they may and everyone will just need to get over it.

The truth is Samsung did violate their patents.

IMO, if you refuse to copy someone else's work then you have the opportunity to really come up with an innovative method or idea. And if you apply it carefully it could be revolutionary.

 

[wilhoitm]

Place me in the box of people who are interested as to Scott Forstall's current where about's.

Inquiring mind's want to know...

There is a rumors that Scott Forstall is on the list of potential Microsoft CEOs since Ballmer got fired. Also, there are some large Microsoft investors trying to kick Bill Gates out as Microsoft's Chairman of the Board saying that he is holding innovation back! It is a strange world we live in!

 

[Rogifan]

Well, after the flat look of iOS 7, I'm sure there are plenty of share holders who wish he never left.
But I'm sure he will testify honestly about the subject at hand.

That's why according to Mixpanel iOS 7 adoption is near 68%?

https://mixpanel.com/trends/#report/ios_7/from_date:-2,to_date:0

 

[Treq]

That's why according to Mixpanel iOS 7 adoption is near 68%?

https://mixpanel.com/trends/#report/ios_7/from_date:-2,to_date:0

It would be a lot less if people could downgrade after installing it and puking...

 

[Rogifan]

There is a rumors that Scott Forstall is on the list of potential Microsoft CEOs since Ballmer got fired. Also, there are some large Microsoft investors trying to kick Bill Gates out as Microsoft's Chairman of the Board saying that he is holding innovation back! It is a strange world we live in!

I don't put much stock in that rumor. Microsoft isn't going to hire as CEO someone who was fired from Apple just a year earlier. If Steve didnt think Scott was qualified/ready to be CEO of Apple, what would make him CEO material for a much more complex company like Microsoft?

 

[samcraig]

The truth is Samsung did violate their patents.

IMO, if you refuse to copy someone else's work then you have the opportunity to really come up with an innovative method or idea. And if you apply it carefully it could be revolutionary.

My only comment is that it is nearly impossible these days to design anything in the tech world without violating a patent. Hence all the battles amongst the tech companies.

 

[Breckenridge]

What is he thinking?! I would not help after getting fired!

It is only the right thing to do. Apple made him Rich. I were him, I would definitely help Apple.

 

[samcraig]

It is only the right thing to do. Apple made him Rich. I were him, I would definitely help Apple.

I'm also pretty sure that IF he is subpoena'd he really has no choice.

 

[Rogifan]

It would be a lot less if people could downgrade after installing it and puking...

But why would the number keep going up? Surely if it was that bad people would stop upgrading? No one is required to upgrade. I haven't installed it on my 3rd gen iPad.

 

[Pyrrhic Victory]

His chest hair is ugly? Who in their right mind pays attention to stuff like that?! Are you sure you don't have "special" feelings for Mr.Ive?

Yes, but I'm not sure that you don't. His chest hair conspicuously appears on every single product announcement video that Apple releases to the public.

 

[kdarling]

According to Koh, the jury may have miscalculated the original damages due to a misunderstanding of patent issues, resulting in a lump sum award that did not distinguish between patent violations. With a lump sum award, the court was unable to determine which part of the damages were applicable to each infringing patent.

This was entirely the fault of Apple's lawyers.

They were the ones who insisted on lumping things together in a very simple yes/no jury form, in the hope that it would encourage/confuse the jurors into making a higher award. And that worked.

Unfortunately, it later backfired because the jury came up with numbers that didn't make sense... and which could not be verified since Apple's lawyers had made sure there was no place to show how things were calculated.