Apple asks the court to stop Samsung from using sensitive sales data in its cross-examination today

Apple asks the court to stop Samsung from using sensitive sales data in its cross-examination today
Apple's Senior VP of Worldwide Marketing Phil Schiller is retaking the witness stand today, and Samsung made a sneaky maneuver submitting late last night that it intends to use sensitive sales data exhibits in the cross-examination today, which Apple doesn't want public.

These include sales data for the iPhone, iPad, iPod touch and so on, which Apple reports on the whole, but there might be thorough breakdowns by different criteria, which Apple doesn't really report in the quarterlies, as it doesn't want them widely known. There are also tracking studies and buyer surveys in there, but it's the sales data that is worrying Apple the most.

Still, Apple's lawyers had time to file two motions asking the court to prevent those exhibits from being made public, commenting for Judge Koh that "Without further action, these highly confidential exhibits will be publicly disclosed causing severe harm to Apple." In case the court doesn't grant the request for those documents to be sealed, Apple asks for a five-day stay, so that it can "seek relief".

via CNET



66. Lwazi_N

Posts: 205; Member since: Jun 23, 2011

We all know Koh will grant Apple's wish.

63. rob5150

Posts: 183; Member since: Oct 31, 2011

Judge koh already made clear that this was an open trial. Nothing sealed. Even innocent third parties like Microsoft and IBM were denied their motions of keeping private information being redacted. So, how in the world can she say it's okay for Apple would keep private. Apple started this case.

64. Droid_X_Doug

Posts: 5993; Member since: Dec 22, 2010

Well, if she did grant Apple's motion, it would tend to support the argument that she is biased in Apple's favor. Lets see where this sorts out. We will probably get a ruling on Monday.

32. wonthanhguy

Posts: 2; Member since: Jun 06, 2012

It's obvious that apple doesn't want to show exact sales figures because you can then calculate exactly how much each device costs to make and how much profit they make. Till now, everything is pretty much speculation, but according to recent remarks from Ive saying they're not in it for the money, but for good products... it'll be a huge marketing blow to their image.

61. wsucoug13

Posts: 164; Member since: May 04, 2012


31. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

"no.. no sweet Koh, dont let them show our financial reports!.. how will we ever prove we are being hurt when they see all the zeros in our quarterly reports and all our record sales and profits!?!"

26. taco50

Posts: 5506; Member since: Oct 08, 2009

All you trolls realize Samsung reports even less then Apple?

45. networkdood

Posts: 6330; Member since: Mar 31, 2010

not as important as this lawsuit is apple's doing. Apple is claiming Samsung copying their products have hurt sales. Apple needs to prove it and the information that they are attempting to supress may indeed prove APPLE wrong. Any smart person can see what apple is doing - they brought this lawsuit on - they need to release the information. Apple needs to prove guilt.

48. taco50

Posts: 5506; Member since: Oct 08, 2009

You didn't read the article. Apple is not refusing to present the evidence at trial. Apple just doesn't want the information made public.

50. networkdood

Posts: 6330; Member since: Mar 31, 2010

Apple should...the entire trial should be public...

71. taco50

Posts: 5506; Member since: Oct 08, 2009

based on what?

94. joey_sfb

Posts: 6794; Member since: Mar 29, 2012

based on Apple started all this iCrap with iSue!

23. darkvadervip

Posts: 366; Member since: Dec 08, 2010

Really all Samsung is doing is the same as they do by knowing all your moves thru your google account. They track where you go what you eat where you sleep and it goes on so don't blast apple on there secrets. My fault samsung deletes there emails and business on purpose before trial. Lol

22. networkdood

Posts: 6330; Member since: Mar 31, 2010

Hmmm...this trial appears to be a farce with apple as the pre-ordained winner....the media is much in love apple...hopefully the fairy tale ends soon.

44. networkdood

Posts: 6330; Member since: Mar 31, 2010

with apple...

21. blazee

Posts: 414; Member since: Jan 02, 2012

I hope Samsung will leak the info eventually regardless of what judge koh orders. It only makes me that much more curious now that apple is trying so hard to keep it under covers

20. TheRetroReplay

Posts: 256; Member since: Mar 20, 2012

Documents like that can prove that Apple is not losing sales to Samsung, which would be very damaging to Apple's case. If Koh allows those documents to not be used, then she is an idiot and/or is biased against Samsung.

19. MorePhonesThanNeeded

Posts: 645; Member since: Oct 23, 2011

Apple has to prove that releasing these documents will cause them erm, harm. This I definitely want to hear. Should it get shot down and records sealed then Samsung will definitely appeal. Is it me, or when ever we hear reports on this case it's always Apple getting one over on Samsung? Who is reporting this stuff, and try to keep it in one place to make it easier to follow.

16. sammy_saw

Posts: 28; Member since: Jan 07, 2012

Just may be they don't want IRS to know there actual sell of there product

15. pats4thewin

Posts: 29; Member since: Jul 10, 2012

if i were samsung, i would motion for a mistrial.

13. roscuthiii

Posts: 2383; Member since: Jul 18, 2010

I don't think there's anything nefarious to be found in their sales figures. I'm sure they're raking in the dough. And that is the problem for them. One of the main things they have to prove to the court is damages. High sales figures make claiming damages nearly impossible. At best the damages would be speculation. No damages means almost zero case. But, this is Koh's court so I imagine it will go something like this: Apple ------ "But Luuuuucy!" J. Koh ----- "Oh, right dear. Motions granted. Don't worry baby, I won't let the bad man get you. Samsung - "But, damag-" *SMACK* J. Koh ----- "Go to stand in the corner!"

12. ibap

Posts: 873; Member since: Sep 09, 2009

Hilarious. "Just take our word for it. We've been harmed. We don't have to discuss the data to support that". "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain." "These are not the droids you are looking for." "Here, drink this Kool-Aid." Why does this feel like the Romney tax records? Is it just that it's an election year? And what is with this judge? I'm sure both sides are already preparing appeal documents.

30. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

why do liberals demand romney's tax records? he's already given the required amount. Why, instead of demanding romney's tax records, dont you demand that Obama's democrats in the admin PAY their taxes instead of trying to cheat the system? Or why not talk about jobs, the economy, or a dozen other things. EXTRA tax records are not important and are nothing more than a distraction to the real isues. Why not just ask the president why it took him so long to produce a birth certificate? One that he was supposed to show as part of the process of BECOMING president.

46. taco50

Posts: 5506; Member since: Oct 08, 2009

Even hard right but jobs have given up on the birth certificate nonsense

57. Droid_X_Doug

Posts: 5993; Member since: Dec 22, 2010

remix - you might have an argument if it weren't for the fact that Mittens dad set the standard for transparency. If we are going to hand the launch codes over to someone who could end life as we know it, it would seem that we need to know something about his integrity. Paying (or not paying) one's taxes is a pretty clear reflection of the level of integrity. I don't know who you are accusing in Barry's administration of not paying their taxes, but if you have proof of the claim(s), please provide it to Mittens' campaign. They would love some relief.

78. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

you gave the launch codes to a guy that had zero record of accomplishment, zero record of accountability, and nothing but a memoir that has been proven to be "imaginative" to state who he was. And your worried about the guy that gives you the legally required tax documents. Mitten's dad was in a different time. Politicians were not nearly as dirty and underhanded as they are now. Whats harder to gather together.. 10 yrs worth of tax returns or your birth certificate that you should have showed when you applied to be president?? Yea he showed it, but the time it took was ridiculous. Yet you want Mitt's tax documents on demand. Ever wonder why they concentrate on that? because they wont talk about the real issues.. the economy, the constant bleeding of jobs, the huge national debt obama gave us on the promise of brighter days and more jobs.. Tax records dont matter. Its a side show. However policy records, jobs, and the economy do. Also, there have been 35+ CONFIRMED members of Obama's administration who have not been paying their taxes since being put into positions in Obama's administration. Why dont you ask why they are NOT paying what they owe, instead of wondering why a guy that paid what he owed, doesnt want to show you more than he needed to. What happends when he shows those records and they are all good? Obama will just say he's too rich to understand and bla bla bla. . yet Obama is worth 10 million now.. so.. whats the difference? One millionaire of privilege understands you better than another millionaire of privilege? Quit falling for political side shows that distract from real issues.

65. audiblenarcotic

Posts: 114; Member since: Nov 16, 2011

Remix. As much as I tend to agree with you when it comes to the world of wireless I can't side with you in the world of politics. I hate to admit that I'm acutally in agreement with taco on something... oh the horror :)

80. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

then, just like taco, you missed the point of bringing up the birth certificate. The point was, he has to prove citizenship to be the President... yet it took him nearly 3 years of being asked to show it, before he did. Romney gave the required amount of tax proof to become president, yet you want him to show way more than he needs to.. on demand. Doesnt he get 3 years as well? And again, its all a DISTRACTION from real issues. Tax returns dont matter. He was already pre-vetted by republicans to get this far. If he had a big skeleton on his tax records, he wouldnt be the nominee. This is just more democrat "oh those evil rich republicans" and another route to push welfare redistribution... all while completely ignoring jobs and the economy. Which is more important to you? Extra tax records or having jobs and businesses growing?

83. tedkord

Posts: 17529; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

Bush II was pre vetted by Republicans prior to the election, and he was a retard who had driven every business he'd been handed on a silver platter into the ground, was a known coke head and draft dodger who didn't even have the intestinal fortitude to show up for the "military" service he'd volunteered for to avoid active service. So forgive me if I have very little faith in the republican vetting process.

87. Droid_X_Doug

Posts: 5993; Member since: Dec 22, 2010

+1. Also, Mittens 'experience' has been more along the lines of financial engineering as opposed to actually creating jobs the old-fashioned way (get a contract, go out and hire people to do the work, get a larger contract when the first contract is up and repeat the hiring process). Any jobs that were created during Mittens tenure were incidental to producing returns for the financial engineers. There is a fundamental element of fairness that is missing from Mittens resume.

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

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit for samples and additional information.
FCC OKs Cingular's purchase of AT&T Wireless