Samsung wants to add two new witnesses to its list, Judge Lucy Koh doesn't allow
The new witnesses Samsung wanted to summon are Dale Sohn, Samsung Telecommunications America President, and Hyong Shin Park, designer of the Samsung F700. However, judge Lucy Koh hasn't allowed that, because Samsung has previously refused Apple's request to produce Dale Sohn as witness, claiming that the person doesn't have any first-hand material knowledge. Hyong Shin Park, on the other hand, will not appear as a witness because the judge says he hasn't designed any of the devices that Apple claims have infringed on its patents (earlier, Apple had said that the F700 is not among the infringing devices).
It's very hard to say who's right and who's wrong in this situation, as we don't know what's really going on behind the scenes. What's your guess - is the US District Judge siding with Apple, or is she being fair?
1. -box- (Posts: 3534; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)
I understand the rationale, but IMHO the defense should be given every reasonable opportunity to defend itself. Innocent until proven guilty!
2. u-suck-more (Posts: 529; Member since: 26 Aug 2011)
usually it is guilty until proven innocent lol
27. jmoita2 (Posts: 930; Member since: 23 Dec 2011)
Unless you're a millionaire celebrity...or Apple; lol
7. hawke9150 (Posts: 30; Member since: 17 Jun 2011)
Ahhh, but in Judge Koh's court its Guilty until proven Innocent. She is still siding with Apple and doing anything she can to make sure the verdict goes thier way.
We are going to see appeal after appeal until it gets to the Supreme Court and then we will see actual changes in what can and cannot be pattened
35. gallitoking (Posts: 4623; Member since: 17 May 2011)
this is not the movies it doesnt work like that.. otherwise trial could take forever.. if they allow anyone on the stand..
42. johnbftl (Posts: 160; Member since: 09 Jun 2012)
I actually have to agree with you for once. Neither witness would seem relevant to the case. The other issue is this isn't about guilt or innocence. It's a civil suit. In all reality, both sides are going to probably end up winning and losing. I'm sure Samsung will have to probably pay some damages, although I don't agree, but Apple is not going to get $2.75 billion.
44. anywherehome (Posts: 971; Member since: 13 Dec 2011)
you have to recognize that iKoh has got money bunch!
3. Astro551 (Posts: 42; Member since: 18 Dec 2011)
I usually don't agree with what Judge Koh is saying but this time I'll let it slide. It's fair enough
8. phitch (Posts: 214; Member since: 06 Mar 2012)
So wait, it is fair that the phone the Galaxy S had come from aesthetically should not be present just because Apple is attempting to sue for other phones instead? So instead of showing this phonehttp://www.samsung.com/us/syst
em/aboutsamsung/content/2007/0which is where their entire design for the Galaxy S had originated the judge is saying it doesn't matter? Yeah, that is fair. 6/11/3516/l_20070208.jpg
11. u-suck-more (Posts: 529; Member since: 26 Aug 2011)
but the fact that Samsung didnt want Apple to use Dale Sohn as witness because '' the person doesn't have any first-hand material knowledge'' and than Samsung chooses to call him as witness is really just contradictory.. so it IS fair for the Judge to reject him as a witness. and the other guy ( Hyong Shin Park ) SHOULD NOT be even called as a witness because he didn't design any of the infringing products. so the Judge is being fair in this scenario
13. remixfa (Posts: 13901; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
I would say that it seems fair based on the same criteria you mentioned.
The 700 is kind of muddy waters though, because it shares a lot of the same design language of other handsets, including the SGS1. He may have designed just the 700, but he could probably also share a lot of inside knowledge on samsung's common design language and processes. On that note, I'd like to see him take the stand, but in strict terms, I understand why she denied him.
15. MartyK (Posts: 665; Member since: 11 Apr 2012)
What you fail to mention is the FACT that SAMSUNG is trying to prove where the Galaxy LINE cames from, thus, (Hyong Shin Park, designer of the Samsung F700) is very important to this case.
Even Apple atty (Kraven) brought in a SONY device to show the jury, however, Samsung was not ALLOW to show a SONY-STYLE device APPLE created (where the iphone came from) to the jury!!
Heck they wasn't even allow to show prior art with a 1969 film by Kubrik, that shows a tablet being use!.
If you like I can post a link to the live blog on this trial so you can follow it!.
39. quakan (Posts: 1064; Member since: 02 Mar 2011)
Iphone didn't come from a Sony device. Project Purple threw out load of BS out of the court.
45. u-suck-more (Posts: 529; Member since: 26 Aug 2011)
the iPhone was not designed after a SONY product. if u read the articles PROPERLY, Apple designed it like HOW SONY would have designed something. it wasn't real phone or mp3 player. it was a sketch/prototype iPhone done by Apple by the way they think SONY would have done designing a phone.
Samsung might say that F700 was their source for ''inspiration'' for the Galaxy line, but is it really? u can read about it here on GSMarena, which gives more details compared to here:
i know this is gon' get a lot of dislikes, but that is what Samsung filed for court. so..
22. phitch (Posts: 214; Member since: 06 Mar 2012)
But he did design them, Samsung is trying to prove that the F700 was the reference design that they used for the Galaxy S. Just because he didn't create the Galaxy S directly doesn't mean his work on the F700 wasn't used in the production of the Galaxy S.
4. som (Posts: 768; Member since: 10 Nov 2009)
If Samsung loss this trials Apple will ban all cell phones in America only iPhone is allow and $1000 per phone and 2 years contract. Samsung loss it will be an iPhone World and Judge Koh enjoy billion dollars pay check from Apple.
20. MISTER.H (banned) (Posts: 167; Member since: 03 Aug 2012)
Well said! but where are all the iFans and users, how
come they never post or write, or say, dispute?
Are the no Apple users in PhoneArena....?
34. bucky (Posts: 1199; Member since: 30 Sep 2009)
I think they just don't have the time to defend against crazy droid fans that have overrun this site.
Seems like the term fanboy belongs to android fans from what I can see here. Every time I look at an article here even if it's pro android or nothing to do with android, there is a bunch of nerds fighting amongst themselves.
24. JessJess (unregistered)
Isn't that rather extreme. And by extreme I mean extremely silly :Z
29. ph00ny (Posts: 556; Member since: 26 May 2011)
except in the legal system, example of a decision will have huge impact on future litigations
43. XPERIA-KNIGHT (Posts: 2384; Member since: 08 Aug 2012)
naaaaa its not going down like that
6. tedkord (Posts: 3777; Member since: 17 Jun 2009)
As far as the gentleman Samsung refused to produce at Apple's request, tough luck to Samsung. That's your own bed you made.
As to the other, the designer of the F700, all evidence about this phone needs to be admitted. It proves once and for all that Apple's rounded corner rectangle was the logical evolution of the smartphone, and others came up with it concurrently.
14. ibap (Posts: 666; Member since: 09 Sep 2009)
Totally agree. And since Apple is suing over "trade dress" and not just technology patents, any designer that worked on a device preceding their iPhone development should certainly be allowed to testify.
12. sp3llv3xit (Posts: 20; Member since: 15 Sep 2011)
She must taste good barbecued with her own fat.
16. MISTER.H (banned) (Posts: 167; Member since: 03 Aug 2012)
After all that people still bye Apple products!
They should advertise and let the world no what a bad company it is!
23. futureray (Posts: 4; Member since: 08 Aug 2012)
Seriously. No matter the outcome this is bad financial decision for Apple. If they win, Samsung will appeal, and Apple will make other Android phone mfrs nervous, but they will adopt, and they will not stop. Even if they get their 2.5 billion then Samsung, they will just have to increase their pricing on components they sell to Apple, and can justify it. It is not likely they will go elsewhere, as Samsung has patents of it own.
If they loose, well Apple shares will have to start to dive. After all they are built on a narrow portfolio of products, and this confirms that iPhone, and iPad patents are junk, and it makes Jobs appear as he took others ideals and just made them popular first.
Best Apple can hope for is a settlement out of court, the sooner the better.
28. ftyler223 (Posts: 140; Member since: 06 Aug 2012)
guys this is wicked annoying. yes apple is throwing some rediculous things in here just like sammy. like the whole rounded corners rectangle thing is stupid. but thats not the main thing going on here. samsung is guilty for making theyre device look very similar to the way the iphone looks. like gears and flowers for their icons was a little stupid on theyre part there was no need to do so. that it self proves sammy was trying to look like apple. get real people. stop bringing up rounded corners. its annoying, you say that and fail to bring the facts. when take the trade dress and you take ui that sammy used on the galaxy its looks alot like an iphone. once you hold them side to side you see that the galaxy is just a cheap plastic version of the iphone with android. thats literally whats going on. sammy copied....
40. MartyK (Posts: 665; Member since: 11 Apr 2012)
So are you saying YOU can't tell the difference between a iphone & Galaxy Line?
What about the Samsung F700 or the LG Prade, have you ever seen these two?, they were in circulation way before the iphone was shown.
THESE ARE THE FACTS!!..bring your FACTS, showing Iphone was here before Samsung F700!!
31. TheRetroReplay (Posts: 236; Member since: 20 Mar 2012)
I think Judge Koh has been siding with Apple this entire time, everything that Apple wants to do she allows but when Samsung wants to do something she denies it. The only thing she didn't allow Apple was that instant win that they motioned for.
She's not allowing Samsung to defend itself.
33. Aeires (unregistered)
They'll be called in the next trial, whoever loses is going to reopen the case higher up. Count on it.
38. JC557 (Posts: 677; Member since: 07 Dec 2011)
WTF?So this ass nugget allows an Apple paid professor who didn't design smartphones on the stand but not the guy who created the F700? Someone needs to investigate her accounts or partnerships. Just like that judge in Australia who definitely has a c9nflict of interest in Apple cases.