Judge Koh upset at Samsung for leaking info to the press
not to allow certain pictures of the Samsung F700 into the trial even though they have been public for some time. This is the handset Samsung says was in development before the Apple iPhone but resembles it (a Americanized version called the Samsung Glyde eventually was sold at Verizon). Judge Koh said that Samsung had produced the pictures too late in the discovery process.
Rejected by the court, Samsung offered the slides to certain media outlets which immediately posted them for the world to see. This did not go down too well with Judge Koh, who might have a disposition similar to Judge Judy as this point. The Judge (Koh, that is, not Judy) demanded from Samsung lead attorney John Quinn the names of everyone involved in leaking the images to the press, and the names of those who authorized it. Courtroom observes say that Judge Koh was "livid" when she found out about the leaks. And this is just day two.
source: TheVerge via Phandroid
1. Hammerfest (Posts: 369; Member since: 12 May 2012)
How the hell did she become a judge?
I havent seen a single SANE statement from her AT ALL, and compared to her previous court cases, I can honestly say, shes either an Apple fangirl, or getting paid VERY well... and no, she doesnt directly have to be accepting money... family, friends, gifts, finding a bag with a million dollars in it...
Whats the saying? One thing does not look like the other?
3. SonyFTW2020 (Posts: 305; Member since: 03 May 2012)
shes furious because what samsung did was something good and this trial is tryna get judged unfairly in favor of apple...Samsung did the right thing
20. Mxyzptlk (Posts: 3639; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
If Samsung wanted to do the right thing they would have designed their products in a way that wouldn't resemble Apple's products. Samsung should take full responsibility of their actions and answer to their mistakes.
27. tedkord (Posts: 4933; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
Yeah, especially those ones that they were designing in 2006, before the iPhone. How dare they steal rectangles from Apple in the future.
Oops. We're not supposed to know about that. I guess Apple will have to give someone else a debilitating disease that allows you to run marathons but not appear in court.
60. Aeires (unregistered)
Let it go Tedkord, he's getting as bad as Taco. No sense trying to reason with someone that biased in their loyalty to Apple.
85. levvy (Posts: 33; Member since: 01 Aug 2012)
And of course " Biasing " isn't truth either.
84. levvy (Posts: 33; Member since: 01 Aug 2012)
The opposite is also correct. "If Apple wanted to do the right thing they would have designed their products in a way that wouldn't resemble Sony's product. Apple should take full responsibility of their action and answer to their mistake."
You are another biased and blind Apple fan. Apple is the Mastermind who stole the original idea from Sony
21. Mxyzptlk (Posts: 3639; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
Can you prove any of that because I'm pretty sure her credentials are far more credible than your unproven claims about her.
58. CharlieAtInfinity (Posts: 253; Member since: 10 Apr 2012)
I bet ya, she is being paid some extra millions by Apple!!!
42. darkkjedii (Posts: 11833; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
Probably by graduating law school, and completing the BAR, then either being elected or appointed to the bench after the processes were all completed. U know the way pretty much all judges become judges. Don't get pissed cuz its not going samsungs way, the tides could change but Samsung is doing stuff she said not to. They're damn lucky she's not judge Judy, or this trial would b over and apple would b 2.5 billion richer.
77. Mark.J.Linskiy (unregistered)
Yeah, I was thinking that too. She is Korea, so that could be a reason along with Apple's money.
2. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
Wow Samsung not earning any favors with their shady tactics. Samsung has really taken the low road with this trial making personal attacks and accusations instead of sticking to facts. Another good example is trying to being in as evidence Steve Jobs' comments about going thermonuclear on android when that has nothing to do with the facts of the case.
13. BREvenson (Posts: 207; Member since: 17 May 2012)
I would say that the comments about Steve Jobs' hatred for Android would go well in a case like this, simply because it proves that since the rise of Android's popularity, Jobs and Apple have made it their mission to destroy it by any means necessary. It's called a motive, my narrow-minded friend; an influencing factor that makes a person (or people) do what they do. Bank robbers have motives, murderers (the sane ones, anyway) have motives, and multi billion-dollar companies that can't stand it when a competitor sells a successful phone have motives.
Apple's motive revolves around its deep-seated hatred of Android, so they will use the courts, their money, their influence, "their" patents to eliminate any and all Android devices that threaten their stranglehold on the market so that they can be the supreme ruler of mobile electronics.
Over. My. Dead. Body.
5. BREvenson (Posts: 207; Member since: 17 May 2012)
The main question is this: Did Judge Koh put out an order restricting Samsung from sharing this information...information that, prior to the trial, was already in the public? If yes, then I'll agree that Samsung did screw up. If not, then what is this judge's problem?
She obviously has it out for Samsung; she's denied every effort of theirs to muster a defense against Apple, and these pics (as well as the testimony regarding Sony's designs) would have sealed the deal. Unfortunately, the judge must not like it when companies not named Apple attempt to defend their products' designs and functions...
How can anyone defend a company that lets the courts do all the talking for them?
18. E.N. (Posts: 2329; Member since: 25 Jan 2009)
I completely agree, I can't decide yet if the judge is being a douche or Samsung was being an idiot in terms of releasing the files to the public.
22. JC557 (Posts: 1129; Member since: 07 Dec 2011)
I have to admit, Samsung, right or wrong, needs to tread carefully considering the judge overseeing this case.
62. Aeires (unregistered)
If Koh's husband is tied to Apple in any way, Samsung needs to file a petition to get Koh removed from the trial and have it moved to neutral ground. Chicago would be a great location, maybe Posner is available.
6. remixfa (Posts: 13930; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
shes mad because shes a lop sided judge. where the hell is impartiality in this case? I would have leaked the images if i were Samsung too. Any juror that has any curiosity about the case will go online and look up stuff about the devices and see the proof. public opinion holds a lot of sway these days.
it must be hard listening to apple whine about how they dont have enough money hiding in offshore accounts.
8. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
Just because she sided in Apple's favor doesn't mean she's impartial. Any trial judge won't allow either side to leak information public because it can sway the jury.
10. remixfa (Posts: 13930; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
this 1 little action by her doesnt make her partial or impartial. But her nice long track record of allowing every arguement by apple and boxing samsung into a corner at every turn shows unquestionably that she is very partial to apple. really..
samsung isnt allowed to show proof of apple's own concept art proving it stole the concept? Really.. samsung isnt allowed to show ITS OWN PHONE that was designed and released long before the iphone that proves unquestionably that samsung's designs are not stolen, but an evolution of their existing lines.
only a moron would not question those actions. oh... yea,.. i forgot who im talking to.
12. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
Well seeing as you have no inside knowledge of the case or how trial law works you're making assumptions. In your mind any decision that sides with Apple is biased and anything in Samsungs favor is just.
11. SonyFTW2020 (Posts: 305; Member since: 03 May 2012)
i gotta say it dude.....you are really a die hard "blind" apple fan aren't you?
40. E.N. (Posts: 2329; Member since: 25 Jan 2009)
he's pretty pro-Apple, but he often makes good arguments. His point is that if the judge treated Apple as they were treating Samsung, there would be no problem and it would be considered as part of the trial..... and I'd have to agree. You guys would be rejoicing if it were the other way around.
I think the case is pretty fair, but the only thing that made me raise my eyebrow was the fact that the judge said "Samsung had produced the pictures too late in the discovery process" and refused to use the new information. I'm not a lawyer, so I really have no idea if that's a valid/fair move.
44. tedkord (Posts: 4933; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
And the reverse is true - if she were treating Apple the way she's trying Samsung, iFans world be calling for her head. So what?
46. E.N. (Posts: 2329; Member since: 25 Jan 2009)
You're probably right. So since no matter what happens someone will complain about unfairness, maybe we should all shut up, stop b*tching, and let whatever happens happen? I'm down for that.
68. remixfa (Posts: 13930; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
I would say the case was a fair fight if they were both able to show whatever evidence they could to support their side. Apple is going in talking about rectangles, why cant samsung show pics of pre-iphone phones that were SOLD, not just concepts, that prove beyond a doubt that their design language was there before the iphone. The F-700 looks extremely similar to the SGS1 in basic shapes and design language and it was out well before the iphone... a long with other phones. Yet they are not allowed to show the F-700??? come on now. That one phone proves their case and discredits apple.
The iphone being the most popular, does mean it has has exclusives on basic shapes. The argument itself is just ridiculous. You dont see RIM going after everyone with a portrait keyboard do you?
72. lauremar (Posts: 181; Member since: 29 Feb 2012)
taco50 = iRobot
I mean seriously, taco has been staring at those square icons on the homescreen of his iDevices way too long that almost like his brain has been programmed like robot that those are the only ones he sees! lmfao
43. darkkjedii (Posts: 11833; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)
I figured the androidiots would thumb down your statement cuz its true and unbiased taco
52. SonyFTW2020 (Posts: 305; Member since: 03 May 2012)
goes to show you we listen to what is right no matter who its from doesnt it? if toco is spitting truth then he wont get thumbs down but most people with good enough knowledge on a subject can pretty much recognize fanboyism and biased opinions dude...
16. Forsaken77 (Posts: 548; Member since: 09 Jun 2011)
Even though Samsung produced those photos late in the discovery process, if the judge wanted a fair trial with all the necessary information, she would've allowed it. Critical information shouldn't been exempt just because it was untimely. That sets up grounds for an appeal right there. Samsung was right to leak the photos. This judge didn't give them a choice and Samsung wants everyone to see that she's already decided the outcome of this case.
45. E.N. (Posts: 2329; Member since: 25 Jan 2009)
if a videotape of a person clearly committing a crime didn't follow all the requirements/procedures to be used as evidence in the court room, it can still be thrown out and disregarded. This has happened many times before. It doesn't matter how critical the information was, it has to follow the rules. This is how the legal system works.
The question you should be asking is if Judge Koh threw out the evidence without proper justification or if it was thrown out based on Samsung's incompetent legal team. If Judge Koh was wrong, they should appeal. If this was indeed Samsung's fault, then they should really try to avoid making anymore mistakes if they intend to win this. Either way, leaking the documents so it could get to the jury against the judges decision was a very bad bad move. Samsung is already in trouble for burying evidence, this isn't helping them. Courtroom Advice #182: Don't piss off the judge.
17. whysoserious (Posts: 316; Member since: 20 Jul 2012)
I don't get it.. I'm not so familiar with trial proceedures and stuff, but for what I understand is that the Judge did not allow any sony design pictures be used in the court, but got mad that it was released in public. Is it illegal?
25. humblebee (Posts: 3; Member since: 01 Aug 2012)
Court Contempt. Wikipedia says it all my friend :)
28. p0rkguy (Posts: 684; Member since: 23 Nov 2010)
If so, doesn't this
"Because of the broad protections of the First Amendment, with extremely limited exceptions, unless the media outlet is a party to the case, a media outlet cannot be found in contempt of court for reporting about a case because a court cannot order the media in general not to report on a case or forbid it from reporting facts discovered publicly. Newspapers cannot be closed because of their content."
prevent Samsung from getting into any trouble?
48. E.N. (Posts: 2329; Member since: 25 Jan 2009)
I don't know if this was outed by the media though. The fact that she asked the attorney for a list of all the individuals involved in "leaking the images to the press" implies that it was done by Samsung's legal team directly.
63. Aeires (unregistered)
I think that has yet to be proven. She's pissed and likely just assumed it was Samsung's legal team in her anger. From what I've read of their lawyer on this case, it doesn't seem like his style to use the media that way. It's likely a member of Samsung, but doubt it's anyone trying the case.
69. remixfa (Posts: 13930; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
it wouldnt even need to be anyone directly. the info that they "leaked" was already public domain knowledge anyways. All one of the lawyers or interns would have to do is bitch about the decision to someone, who then takes it apon themselves to "leak" whats going on to the media. The lawyers/whomever will get reprimanded for talking about the case outside of the courtroom, but as far as direct evidence pointing to one of them.. I doubt that exists.
19. xtian1103 (Posts: 361; Member since: 11 Feb 2012)
so what if samsung wins this case, judge kho would have praises as high as heavens from android fans. admit it, if the verdict don't favor your side, you curse the judge.
29. tedkord (Posts: 4933; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
No, because Koh about device the case, a jury will. Though, it seems that she will do anything in her power to affect the verdict.
23. Mxyzptlk (Posts: 3639; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
Leaking information in a court case is supposed to be illegal anyways. What in the world was Samsung thinking?
24. whysoserious (Posts: 316; Member since: 20 Jul 2012)
But the point is, the Judge did not let the pictures be used in the court in the first place so why is she mad?
26. SonyFTW2020 (Posts: 305; Member since: 03 May 2012)
Right! if your not allowed inside the court house then where do you belong? outside....So why is she mad that the evidence is actually where she wanted it to be?
50. E.N. (Posts: 2329; Member since: 25 Jan 2009)
because the point of leaking the images would be to influence the jury outside the courtroom, despite the fact that the judge clearly said it can't be used. I bet every single member of the jury has seen these documents online (I'm guessing because they'd have to be somewhat techy to be on the jury for a high-profile case like this). These documents will now weigh in their final decision, even though its been officially deemed not fit for the trial. Not only is it likely that every single member of the jury has seen it, but Apple will never have a chance to refute the documents because in the courtroom, it will never be brought up. Samsung didn't "leak" the documents for entertainment purposes.
54. SonyFTW2020 (Posts: 305; Member since: 03 May 2012)
they dont have to have the documents on paper in the court room anymore........All they have to do is power up the internet and run a slide show!!
66. remixfa (Posts: 13930; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
Actually, I would assume that Apple wants the LEAST techy group of jurors possible. The more tech savy the jurors, the less Apple's chances of winning on "rectangles and circles". The arguments they are making as far as lost profits and such would only be conceivable to someone who doesnt understand economics or doesnt have a clue about tech and cell phones in particular... or a completely blind troll. But the odds of one of those being there is pretty slim.
Apple's case is just a bunch of weak threads put together to look like something bigger. If Samsung were not getting unfavorable treatment from this crazy judge, the case would be half way over and/or thrown out.
30. tedkord (Posts: 4933; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
The pictures were already public domain, and she didn't specifically order them not released.
31. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
Man sounds like you should represent Samsung
32. Retro-touch (Posts: 260; Member since: 24 Oct 2011)
You must be stupid, there's a difference between information that is confidential being leaked and information that is ALREADY publicly available being leaked in timely fashion, in this case, its not right because it can sway the jury's decision but it was available prior so I don't see the issue. There might be annoying legal procedures that they infringed though
33. SonyFTW2020 (Posts: 305; Member since: 03 May 2012)
yea and you most definitely could fit in with apple! smh
41. tedkord (Posts: 4933; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
And you sound like you should make sure the fries are done.
70. remixfa (Posts: 13930; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
you think they've let him graduate to fries yet? I dunno,.. that fry timer is preeeety tricky.
73. lauremar (Posts: 181; Member since: 29 Feb 2012)
And you should represent Apple dude! Sit right beside Judge Koh while in the courtroom too.
35. nastynaps (Posts: 93; Member since: 16 Aug 2011)
The judge is mad over this? It's not like a trial against a mob boss where if certain info is released to the public someone just might die. This is silly, we really need to get our priorities straight here. This is a trial between two huge corporations over the design of a frikken phone! What ever happened to just making a better product? I understand if your intellectual property is stolen you want that protected but come on, it's clear that no property was stolen. Everybody makes these phones now, should each company sue each other for making similar products and picking up on a good idea? Companies make it harder for average people to access the courts and protect themselves everyday all the while using the system to wage financial war on each other. We're here taking sides...laughable.