Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Isn't that tampering of evidence? Or obstruction of justice? Any lawyers here to give us some insights into this matter?

That should be common knowledge. Games like that would get the lawyers responsible for it disbarred, and the clever thing is that if you are found to hide evidence, a court will assume that the evidence that you were hiding would have been against you.


Wait, Samsung bought Motorola who still supplies parts to Apple. Am I getting this right? Or I'm misguided?

Google bought Motorola or is in the process of buying it; not sure how far the deal has gone legally.
 
Actually, now that I think about it, I really want to see Ive take the stand.

Ive voice: "When you make a product that is so... game changing as the iPod, iPhone, and iPad have been... you get... copycats. But, when the product is not just game changing... but truly special, the copycats... they can be quite large companies. And the lengths they will go to... to justify their... shameless ripoffs of my work... can be hilarious."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Schwyz
I don't even know why they want the source code? I thought this was about "likeliness" of product designs and interfaces. Implementation details shouldn't help there. Or maybe I'm not following this case well enough.

Likeness of the product designs could mean the same source code. Like even the misspelled word could be found in both the Apple code and the Samsung code.

No no no... This case has nothing to do with likeness of products. That's the iPad vs. Galaxy Tab suit. This is a different case altogether.

Read the article please.
 
In the legal environment, it's known as a joke.

IANAL, but that does sound suspiciously like tapering with evidence. Obstruction of justice is more of a criminal law versus civil law.

That should be common knowledge. Games like that would get the lawyers responsible for it disbarred, and the clever thing is that if you are found to hide evidence, a court will assume that the evidence that you were hiding would have been against you.

Thanks for the explanations. :)



Google bought Motorola or is in the process of buying it; not sure how far the deal has gone legally.

Ah, I see. So there is Apple vs Samsung and another suit of Apple vs Motorola for Xoom.
 
IANAL, but that does sound suspiciously like tapering with evidence. Obstruction of justice is more of a criminal law versus civil law.

Apple has already tapered evidence starting with the iPad 2. :D
 
No no no... This case has nothing to do with likeness of products. That's the iPad vs. Galaxy Tab suit. This is a different case altogether.

Read the article please.

Ok, but the article also talked about acquiring the source code. It could be for the same reason too.
 
Samsung just give up. This is ridiculous.

Just try and design something that competes fare and square with Apple. Drop these damn lawsuits. This is truly where lawyers get a bad wrap. What a waste of peoples time.

There's more important things going on in this world than going after a competitor because its phone is better than your phone.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/9A334)

This is getting pathetic Samsung.
 
This is a getting silly. It seems like there should be a better, less bombastic way to resolve this. Seems like two bullies with escalating tactics. None of that is to discount the claims...just...man, this seems overmuch.
 
Samsung should focus their time and resources on making better mobile devices or at least marketing the ones they have. Though I guess getting in the news with Apple is the closest they'll get to significant exposure.
 
In particular, Samsung is keen to find out the amounts of subsidies paid by Telstra, Optus and Vodafone to Apple for selling the iPhones on plans.

[Samsung lawyer Cynthia Cochrane noted:] "If subsidies [are] given for the iPhone 4S, there are less to go around for my client's products."

uhhh, so?


ZDNet article: Apple has objected to producing any of the documentation, stating that it is irrelevant to the case.



Maybe I missed something (or maybe the article doesn't explain the unfolding story), but it does look like Samsung is grasping at straws.





.
 
Last edited:
Samsung and their lies are not going to get my money.... Not for smartphones nor for my new tv set (planning to buy this November) no!
Samsung.... What have you done so great lately? Yeah just Ripping off others idea!

Your loss on the tv set.
 
Actually... I love their TV's... IMHO, some of the best ones out there and easiest to use. It's the one area Samsung really does well.

I bought one at Circuit City a few years back. It was busted, so I had to bring it back. After a few days, again this one was busted and I had to bring it back. Since then Circuit City has closed, my tv has a vertical line going down it on the right side, and if i turn it off for to long, when i turn it back on the whole left side of the tv is purple and fuzzy and takes nearly twenty minutes to be working properly.

Yeah, they're great.
 
Can you be any more shameless ? I bet the next one would be 'Samsung asks Apple board of directors to take their pants off and do the monkey dance'.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.