Judge denies Apple request to punish Samsung for leaking evidence; warns against more "theatrics"
When word that Samsung had sent the excluded slideshow evidence to media outlets, Apple on Wednesday requested that the court punish Samsung's attorneys for "egregious" misconduct meant to get the jury to lean toward Samsung's position. On Thursday, Apple filed for a summary judgment which, if granted, would have ended the case right then and there with Apple as the victor. Samsung attorney John Quinn called Apple's request an "an affront to the integrity of the jury," and "frivolous at every level."
Judge Koh told both sides that the in-court objections are taking up too much time and also gave both sides a final verbal warning against "grandstanding". The Judge told both Apple and Samsung, "I will not let any theatrics or sideshows distract us from what we're here to do, which is to fairly and timely decide this case".
12. Techvue (Posts: 10; Member since: 25 Jul 2012)
Wow, impressed by her today. But still... She tried to censor evidence from the public. She did censor evidence from the jury. And, Apple backed censorship. For what reason?
51. Hemlocke (unregistered)
Samsung didn't present it within the time limit that they knew about, not to mention they destroyed evidence (emails) and never produced the court-ordered source code. They have gotten off pretty light, so far.
60. Mxyzptlk (limited) (Posts: 2846; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
So now it's good? Fandroids were cussing the woman left and right. She makes one notion regarding the case above and now you like her?
83. The_Godfather (Posts: 146; Member since: 26 Apr 2012)
What the f**k is wrong with Apple?
Are they thinking that they can increase their sales for next iPhone or iPad in this way? They are f**king ruining Apple's image in the market with these moves.
Bottom line is "Apple's" days would be over soon. Love you Sammy :(
84. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5279; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)
Probably the best way to understand what is motivating Apple to go after Sammy is that Sammy is the only Android manufacturer to pose an existential threat to Apple. The smartphone market's profits are pretty evenly split between Apple and Sammy. Everyone else is pretty much single digit percentages.
When you are faced with a challenge to your existence, you bear any burden and incur any cost. Which is what Apple is doing.
2. MalakiMills (Posts: 255; Member since: 15 Jun 2010)
Good for the judge for pointing out how ridiculous some of these actions are (the whole dang thing is ridiculous but my point remains).
47. neutralguy (Posts: 1152; Member since: 30 Apr 2012)
THIS. amen for the "the whole dang thing is ridiculous".
3. andro. (Posts: 1927; Member since: 16 Sep 2011)
I like the picture chosen to present this article,I wonder who the dark side of the face represents?!
4. Angkor (Posts: 108; Member since: 05 Jul 2012)
Judge Koh trial should be focusing on "Look and Feel" as Apple claimed not functionality or others and allow Samsung to prove the Look and Feel that Apple copied from others.
5. jroc74 (Posts: 3975; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
Wow...some good news for Samsung in this case for a change...
7. SprintPower (Posts: 71; Member since: 29 Dec 2008)
Sounds like judge Ito and the Simpson trial.
30. E.N. (Posts: 2218; Member since: 25 Jan 2009)
I'm glad to see that most of you are in a better mood today. Hopefully no more whining about Judge Koh being a meany to Sammy :(
45. 305Bucko (Posts: 506; Member since: 07 Aug 2011)
My thought exactly E.N.
I own an iPhone, doesnt mean I favor apple. I actually prefer Android by FAR. People already assume she favors apple cuz she has an iPhone. ...really?
87. SirCheese (Posts: 15; Member since: 28 Jul 2012)
It's her actions...not that she owns an iphone...
10. EclipseGSX (Posts: 1471; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)
Nyanyanyanya nya nyah! Hahahaha ha ha!
11. -box- (Posts: 3565; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)
No grandstanding or theatrics? Isn't that apple's entire strategy?
14. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
So today all the fandroids think Judge Koh is a great judge. Don't you see how ridiculous you all are. With each decision you completely change your opinion based on if it's in Apple favor or not. You guys don't care about facts or merit at all.
15. remixfa (Posts: 13902; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
if that came from someone who wasnt a completely mental one sided troll, it might not be so hollow.
yea, because she finally made a decent decision.. which the inverse would have been to end the trial declaring Apple the automatic victor.. people are happy.
gee.. i wonder why your not happy about it troll.
16. tedkord (Posts: 3908; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
We are happy with the decision, not the Judge. There's a difference.
17. SonyFTW2020 (Posts: 305; Member since: 03 May 2012)
were not glad for her LOL were glad at the decision! she could flip out at any moment for all we know....stop hating cause were not out this thing yet taco bell....
19. SonyFTW2020 (Posts: 305; Member since: 03 May 2012)
you know what makes me thumb down people? idiots that talk like they got sense but miss the "BIG" picture of things....cough.... cough.... taco bell.........Dude you have knowledge enough to understand things but you choose to hate on whats right, which makes you look ignorant and dumb...to be real with you
18. tedkord (Posts: 3908; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
And, since you don't want Samsung's evidence introduced, you clearly don't care about facts or merit in the least. If facts or merit mattered to you, you'd want the evidence entered into the record. But, of course all you care about is that Apple prevails, no matter how. The ends justify the means.
31. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
Samsung needs to follow the judicial process if they want their evidence introduced. Not my fault or judge Koh's fault they can't do that.
33. tedkord (Posts: 3908; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
Regardless, they are facts. If you cared about facts, you'd want them introduced.
34. BREvenson (Posts: 190; Member since: 17 May 2012)
Apple was just trying to get the judge to end the case with a bogus summary judgment because of that rejected evidence. Would that be your idea of the "judicial process"? I doubt Samsung, or any normal-minded individual, would want to see it end like that.
Believe it or not, Samsung has been following the process pretty damn well; they are up against a wall with Apple and this judge, so they need to supply irrefutable evidence that they did not copy Apple. Since such evidence was not allowed, they leaked it out to the public, where it had already been in the first place. Apple didn't like it, and neither did the judge...but there was nothing they did (or could have done) to stop it.
This fight is far from over, and both sides are going to keep going at it until they have nothing left. Who knows when that's going to be...
42. networkdood (Posts: 5506; Member since: 31 Mar 2010)
Do not be an iDIOT, Taco....oh....too late - nevermind
22. pkiran1996 (Posts: 160; Member since: 22 Oct 2011)
Because what Apple are requesting is ridiculous and petty. And if she censored evidence from Apple we all know you would be crying your eyes out in your little troll hub.
24. jroc74 (Posts: 3975; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
I know good n well you are not trying to act all holier than tho....
Is this where pot...meets...kettle?
And since the judge doesnt want actual old phones Samsung made allowed....F700...and development ideas from Samsung, yet allows Apple's.....I dont see how you care about facts...since that decision favors Apple.
26. Sniggly (Posts: 6478; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
Actually, before you commented, not a SINGLE OTHER PERSON voiced a different general opinion about Koh than that which we have been saying. Most of Koh's decisions in this case have still been ludicrous in their bias against Samsung. Now, finally, today, she has made a correct decision regarding this case. People have said this was a good decision, but not the rest.
Your reading comprehension fails you again, Taco.
27. taz89 (Posts: 1944; Member since: 03 May 2011)
Judge must have finally gotten a free galaxy s3 lol
29. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
So ludicrous decision = anything in Apple's favor
Correct decision = anything in Samsung's favor.
You guys could care less about the facts. Apple could produce an audio recording of Samsung's whole design team admitting to copying the iPhone and you'd still deny Samsung did anything wrong.
32. willard12 (Posts: 545; Member since: 04 Jul 2012)
Samsung could produce a video of an Apple CEO stating that Apple has been shameless about stealing great ideas from others and you still wouldn't admit that Apple copies........and that's not a hypothetical.
36. Sniggly (Posts: 6478; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
If Apple produces any evidence of willful intent to continue copying Apple designs with no attempt to add their own spin on them, I will admit that Samsung f**ked up.
However, and I have the screenshot to prove this, you openly admitted that you hope Apple gets patents for things they didn't invent, like Android's notification system, just so they can attack Android with those patents.
This revealed, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that you care nothing for righteousness in this case. Like Apple, you just want Android gone for good no matter what the cost.
You can never get away from that comment, Taco. I have it saved for perpetuity.
37. jroc74 (Posts: 3975; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
lol...I remember that day....I could see the steam coming from your post...lol.
49. Sniggly (Posts: 6478; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
I was simply flabbergasted that he could be so morally bankrupt.
44. networkdood (Posts: 5506; Member since: 31 Mar 2010)
I read Taco comments and I lose brain matter by the post....
53. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
Sniggly I want the fair thing to happen. Samsung copied Apple and should be punished for it.
56. Sniggly (Posts: 6478; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
You asked for it.
Do you deny saying this?
57. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)
Can't see it I don't have a google + account
58. Sniggly (Posts: 6478; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
Yeah, except you're full of s**t. I've tested the link on browsers where I'm not signed into Plus, and I can see the picture just fine.
63. Sniggly (Posts: 6478; Member since: 05 Dec 2009)
You have to be kidding me. What browser are you using?
67. RapidCat (Posts: 351; Member since: 12 Jun 2012)
he using safari browser, thats why, hahahaha
74. Aeires (unregistered)
Just ignore him, he's just commenting to get attention. If he doesn't get it, he'll move somewhere where people will give him what he wants. Stop replying to him if he doesn't have anything worthwhile to add to the conversation.
64. willard12 (Posts: 545; Member since: 04 Jul 2012)
The link says," Taco50: What would be great is if Apple can patent their notifications and go after Google."
1. In this quote you acknowledge Apple copies Google.
2. You advocate patent trolling.
If you acknowledge that Apple copies, Steve Jobs admits to shamelessly stealing, why do you continue to go on and on and on and on about the perceived copying of others?
61. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5279; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)
It opens fine in Firefox and Dolphin browsers on my RAZR's ICS and in Safari on my GF's iPad3. This is going to be my last post, though - GF is more important than taco.
85. Mxyzptlk (limited) (Posts: 2846; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
Why don't you just post a working link instead?
75. networkdood (Posts: 5506; Member since: 31 Mar 2010)
taco that is not true, I am not signed into my google acct and I can see it....
40. jroc74 (Posts: 3975; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
And this is how you and folks like you see it:
So ludicrous decision = anything in Samsung's favor
Correct decision = anything in Apple's favor.
So whats the point of these posts? They are worthless. Please dont try to come off like you arent one of PA's biggest Apple fanboys.
43. PhoneArenaUser (Posts: 4599; Member since: 05 Aug 2011)
No, he just loves his iPhone because it is easy to use. :D
81. LionStone (Posts: 434; Member since: 10 Dec 2010)
Enh! Wrong again...Apple "could" NOT because audio recordings are not permissible in court.
35. whysoserious (Posts: 313; Member since: 20 Jul 2012)
It never cease to amuse me to see how shallow and stupid your comments are and have always been.