x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Hidden picShow menu
  • Home
  • News
  • Samsung punished by Judge for failing to turn over source code in Apple patent suit

Samsung punished by Judge for failing to turn over source code in Apple patent suit

Posted: , by Alan F.

Tags :

Samsung punished by Judge for failing to turn over source code in Apple patent suit
Apple's request for sanctions against Samsung have been granted by United States District Court Magistrate Judge Paul S. Grewal. The Judge is presiding over an Apple-Samsung patent infringement battle and received a motion from Apple back in March requesting that the sanctions be placed on the Korean based firm for failing to produce source code and other documents that it had been ordered by the court to turn over. Apple's concern is that the delays caused by Samsung's failure to produce source code and documents make it too time consuming to conduct analysis of Samsung's ever changing Android source code. That, in turn, makes Apple's claim of patent infringement against Samsung a "moving target".

The Judge punishes Samsung

The Judge punishes Samsung

Just two weeks ago, Samsung was fined by the court after the same Judge found Samsung to be in violation of a court order. The company failed to turn over documents it had that mentioned Apple's products. The Cupertino based tech titan was planning on using these documents to show that Samsung had infringed on Apple's designs. Judge Grewal is a bit more upset now after the failure of Samsung to hand over the important source code. The code was supposed to show how Samsung had worked around Apple's patent in designing certain aspects of its products, including the "overscroll bounce" that is protected by
U.S. Patent No. 7,469,381. Turning over the code might have helped Samsung with its defense.

Apple's attorneys have told the Judge that it is now too late for them to use the source code and asked the court to ban Samsung from using the source code for its defense. In his sanctions order, the Judge said, "Samsung shall be precluded from offering any evidence of its design-around efforts for the '381, '891 and '163 patents, and shall not argue that the design-arounds are in any way distinct from those versions of code produced in accordance with the court's order. Samsung must instead rely solely on the versions of code that were produced on or before December 31, 2011."

Samsung just might have shot itself in the foot as the older code that it has to rely on now with this case, is more likely to infringe on Apple's patents than the newer code that it failed to produce to the court in a timely fashion.

source: FossPatents via AppleInsider

53 Comments
  • Options
    Close






posted on 05 May 2012, 15:22 7

1. maxican16 (Posts: 364; Member since: 29 Sep 2011)


Hard to out lawyer someone when you fail to lawyer for yourself.

posted on 05 May 2012, 16:08 4

2. sdfvsdf (Posts: 3; Member since: 04 May 2012)


i wonder how much money all these lawyers made so far with this court battles...i'm guessing about 500-800 million dollars

posted on 05 May 2012, 16:17 7

3. Bluesky02 (Posts: 1439; Member since: 05 Dec 2011)


There's a joke around the web.:)
Samsung Galaxy 3 design by Lawyers, making it lawsuits proof and ugly

posted on 05 May 2012, 21:28 7

8. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)


Hahaha

Android fans got Samsunged

posted on 05 May 2012, 22:21 12

10. LionStone (Posts: 753; Member since: 10 Dec 2010)


hahaha...you mean you do every time you touch your little iphone.

posted on 06 May 2012, 12:11 1

27. thelegend6657 (unregistered)


Lionstone I agree that the iPhone screen is considered small in today's standard but for people with small hands it's fine .
Btw stop bashing about iPhone's small screens heh there are a lot of android phones that have smaller screens than the iPhone

posted on 06 May 2012, 15:02 2

35. remixfa (Posts: 14255; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


i dont even remember the last time i sold a 3.5 inch touch screen phone.

posted on 07 May 2012, 08:43

49. -box- (Posts: 3991; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)


@thelegend I can only think of a few that have less than 3.5" screen, and they're not very popular, tend to be on the low end... Pantech Crossover is the only one I can think of off the top of my head. 4"-4.3" tends to be the norm

posted on 05 May 2012, 22:47 6

11. jove39 (Posts: 1889; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)


SGS2 user myself...but I genuinely dislike design of SGS3...just saying!

posted on 06 May 2012, 09:34 1

23. medicci37 (Posts: 1288; Member since: 19 Nov 2011)


Actually, Samsung just got Samsunged. Thats karma for putting out pos pentile phones.

posted on 06 May 2012, 12:06 3

26. thelegend6657 (unregistered)


The s3 looks good at the front . Turn it around and you will find that the back is really ugly !
If I am buying an android phone , it will be the OneX for high end model , s2 or razr for mid range

posted on 05 May 2012, 17:16 8

4. roscuthiii (Posts: 2226; Member since: 18 Jul 2010)


The source code never should have been turned over to Apple but to an independent 3rd party.
My neighbor just got a nice new big screen tv you can't miss though his window. I'd like to press charges for robbery and hive him turn over his tv to me in court so I can determine if that was indeed my tv or not. My sources say that I'm definitely going to find that to be my stolen tv.

posted on 05 May 2012, 23:41 2

15. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5993; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)


It is going to be rather hard for you to 'prove' your neighbor's flat panel TV was stolen from you absent a sales receipt for the same model and if a serial number is on the sales receipt, it will need to be on the unit you claim was stolen from you. No police report is another hurdle you will need to explain as well.

posted on 06 May 2012, 01:20 1

18. Lucas777 (Posts: 2137; Member since: 06 Jan 2011)


so what is ur neighbor trying to hide by not handing it over? if they legitly bought it, why not show u, the third party, everybody that it wasnt stolen?

posted on 06 May 2012, 12:43

30. Whateverman (Posts: 3271; Member since: 17 May 2009)


Wait...you can't be serious! If I claim that you stole something, do you mean to tell me you will produce receipt for it to prove to me you didn't steal it? Would you really just hand over the contracts you signed with your personal information if I said I thought you stole your home or your car? I don't think you would, because you have no idea what I will do with that info. But in this case, it sounds like it would have been better for Samsung to just hand over the code since it was old anyway.

posted on 06 May 2012, 15:01

34. Lucas777 (Posts: 2137; Member since: 06 Jan 2011)


haha it was partly to show how his analogy wasnt quite the best analogy... but going along with it i would just show the receipt, not hand it over, which seems a little bit much for me-- samsung should not have to hand it over, but they should show they did not copy in a timely manner

posted on 06 May 2012, 21:17 1

45. Whateverman (Posts: 3271; Member since: 17 May 2009)


True, Samsung should have just tried to prove their innocence. But to be perfectly honest, I think Samsung does look guilty at this point. They may not "copy" Apple, but they do seem to be heavily influenced by them at times.

posted on 06 May 2012, 21:29 1

46. Lucas777 (Posts: 2137; Member since: 06 Jan 2011)


i agreeā€¦ samsung seems to be provoking apple at times and then wondering why they get attackedā€¦

posted on 06 May 2012, 09:12 1

21. roscuthiii (Posts: 2226; Member since: 18 Jul 2010)


I think you may be missing the point of the analogy, but that's okay, I'm not always as eloquent as I'd like to be. Basically, when any plaintiff is just handed over the disputed item for their own review there is greater likelihood their findings will be in their favor. You think any large corporation is going to honor the honor system?
If Apple wants Samsung's source code to be reviewed then it should only be submitted to a 3rd party, court appointed preferably, which also has Apple's source code to be cross-checked against.
The burden of proof in American courts is supposed to be placed on the plaintiff's shoulders, not on the defendant's.

posted on 05 May 2012, 17:29 1

5. darkvadervip (Posts: 365; Member since: 08 Dec 2010)


Some of you all are just plain ignorant. Its plain and simple. Samsung should pay for using patents. When it's all said and done if I was Samsung I would drop android and make window only phones since google bought Motorola and make a fair war of it and if I was microsoft agree to let Nokia make iOS's using dual swaps with apple and windows combined for the google killer.

posted on 05 May 2012, 19:41 9

7. MartyK (Posts: 847; Member since: 11 Apr 2012)


Yea, Right!, ask HTC how's that working out for them (appeasing MS); the best thing Samsung, HTC and Google (any one else getting sue by MS/APPLE) can do is to sign a pact to protect(sell patents back and forth) each other from attacks.

posted on 05 May 2012, 18:48 6

6. Atrixboyyy (Posts: 370; Member since: 03 Nov 2011)


What's funny here is apples precious device is full of Samsung yet they claim samsung is stealing device designs and infringing on patents. I wonder how many lawyers judges etc... I thought they were gonna meet up and squash this.

Companies get more patty as they go on.

posted on 06 May 2012, 09:14 3

22. mrochester (unregistered)


The iPhone having parts inside it that are made by Samsung doesn't grant Samsung a license to steal Apple property. That's some crazy logic there!

posted on 06 May 2012, 12:47

31. thedarkside (Posts: 654; Member since: 30 Apr 2012)


samsung used to make only the glass for the screen if i can remember correctly. i dont believe they made any other parts for them.

posted on 06 May 2012, 15:05 2

36. remixfa (Posts: 14255; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


samsung doesnt make glass

however they make the chips that run the iphone. the screen is made by LG. The only thing apple in the whole thing is the logo and the software.

posted on 06 May 2012, 15:53

38. thedarkside (Posts: 654; Member since: 30 Apr 2012)


i would almost swear that i saw that samsung made it. oh well, i cant win them all. i just cant remember where or how long ago i saw that but silly me. not worth arguing over. im not trying to be another taco.

posted on 06 May 2012, 19:00 2

41. remixfa (Posts: 14255; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


supposedly corning makes the glass for the iphone, but it breaks so easily its hard to believe. Samsung uses corning's gorilla glass on all their nicer devices. As far as I know there is no internal glass manufacturing at samsung for their phones, its all outsourced.

posted on 06 May 2012, 18:50 1

40. taco50 (banned) (Posts: 5506; Member since: 08 Oct 2009)


Having wrong info never slows you down does it?

posted on 06 May 2012, 19:01 2

42. remixfa (Posts: 14255; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)


obviously its never slowed you down at all, taco.

posted on 07 May 2012, 14:07

51. thedarkside (Posts: 654; Member since: 30 Apr 2012)


i do apologize for my lack of information of the subject.

* Some comments have been hidden, because they don't meet the discussions rules.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories