Despite day off from court proceedings, Judge Koh has busy day with rulings

Despite day off from court proceedings, Judge Koh has busy day with rulings
If you have been wondering whether or not the rulings made by Judge Lucy Koh in the current Apple v. Samsung patent trial have all seemed to go against Samsung, Samsung seems to agree with you. Before we get into that, we have to add that today was a day off and their were no courtroom proceedings. But that didn't stop Judge Koh from making some more rulings that limit what Samsung can show the jury in order to prove that Apple's patents are invalid or were not infringed upon.

Scene from 2001

Scene from 2001

Judge Koh ruled that the Korean based manufacturer cannot show devices from the film 2001: A Space Odyssey (which was released in 1968). Add that to the designs from Sony that former Apple designer Shin Nishibori allegedly referred to when drawing early design sketches of the Apple iPhone, and you can feel why Sammy feels that the judge is not allowing the jury to see the whole picture. And don't forget the Samsung F700. Even though pictures of the device have been around for years, Samsung was blocked by the judge from showing the jury this phone which Samsung claims was in development before the Apple iPhone. The Samsung F700 does resemble the iPhone with its capacitive touchscreen, but there is a side-sliding QWERTY keyboard that is not a feature of Apple's smartphone. The F700, as we told you, was the subject of an end-around where Samsung released to the media slides and pictures of the phone along with testimony from a deposition taken by the ailing Nishibori. This earned Samsung's legal team the ire of Judge Koh.

As part of her ruling on Thursday related to 2001: A Space Odyssey, Judge Koh ruled again that Samsung cannot show the jury any of the Sony-inspired Apple iPhone designs. The judge also said that Samsung can use a Compaq and Fidler tablet to prove that Apple's patents are invalid, but not to prove that it didn't infringe on Apple's patents.

The trial continues on Friday with Apple Senior VP Phil Schiller on the stand. Schiller was in the middle of testifying on Wednesday when court recessed.

source: AllThingsD

FEATURED VIDEO

74 Comments

1. issa8

Posts: 54; Member since: Jul 26, 2011

I don't understand... Why would she block a defendant from trying to prove their innocence? Shouldn't the defendant be allowed to show whatever they want that might prove their case? Maybe I'm just ignorant about how all this works but it just seems really sketchy. What is going on? How did they go about picking this judge?

2. firelightx

Posts: 71; Member since: Oct 13, 2011

I have the exact same questions.

7. RORYREVOLUTION

Posts: 3131; Member since: Jan 12, 2010

Seriously, couldnt have said it better myself. She showed her biased bullcrap before this trial even began. Apple just wants to create an monopoly and their sheep are too stupid or blind to realize it. You say you want Apple to ban products but you fail to realize it will hurt you also in the end. No competition means, no further advancement in technology in their products for much higher prices.

22. gallitoking

Posts: 4721; Member since: May 17, 2011

motion pictures are fictional.. is that simple.. and about the Sony designs are irrelevant.. as that only shows that Samsung did in fact copied... good job by the judge not biting into Samsung bogus claims..

34. RORYREVOLUTION

Posts: 3131; Member since: Jan 12, 2010

Gallitoking, enjoy paying 500 dollars on contract for your next iphone.

38. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

the point of 2001 is that the idea of a big square tablet with rounded edges and a centered screen was NOT dreamed up by Apple. That is exactly what they use in that 1968 movie. If what they used was a little more thin and had a metalic paint coating, it would be near exactly what an ipad looks like. I'd think that pretty much invalidates Apple's claim right there. An author thought of the design 40+ years prior. They should sue apple for infringement.

39. Zero0

Posts: 592; Member since: Jul 05, 2012

Designs aren't fictional. And if Apple copied Sony, then Apple's design patents are invalid, which means that Apple shouldn't be compensated for Samsung's alleged copying.

58. ardent1

Posts: 2000; Member since: Apr 16, 2011

Android fanboys who are also programmers will be the first to point out Apple didn't copy Sony because Apple writes it's own code.

71. PhoneArenaUser

Posts: 5498; Member since: Aug 05, 2011

Talk goes not about the code...

23. Angkor

Posts: 108; Member since: Jul 05, 2012

Judge Koh is discrimination against Samsung. How about old Star Trek movie, can Samsung show to the public?

37. Droid_X_Doug

Posts: 5993; Member since: Dec 22, 2010

Judges make mistakes. A company of which I was a member of the executive team had a similar experience. We lost at the trial court level. On appeal the entire award was nullified and the case was remanded with instructions for the trial court judge. Right after that, the other party filed for BK. Sh*t happens.

48. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

Why can they NOT show the F700???? Thats an actual Samsung phone....that came out in early 2007? Wow....

56. -box-

Posts: 3991; Member since: Jan 04, 2012

Even with 2001:ASO out, there's still Star Trek: TNG (episode 1 even), Serenity (Joss Whedon's Firefly movie), as well as numerous other PRODUCTION tablets that preceded the maxiPad.

57. ardent1

Posts: 2000; Member since: Apr 16, 2011

You have a lynch mob mentality because if she didn't rule in Samsung's favor, then she must be against Samsung. Oh please! Judge Koh has a thankless job because Samsung and Apple couldn't comes to terms. If you recall, she wanted Samsung and Apple to work out their differences out of court! She also asked the Samsung legal team if they could recognize the difference between and iPad and the Samsung tablet (as she held both devices) and the Samsung attorney stated something to the effect, "not at a distance of ten feet." She's been fair to both sides. Instead, the android fanboy camp attack her education (despite possessing a Harvard law degree), her ethnicity (that she's somehow defective because she's Asian), etc. Lastly, in America, the defendant CANNOT be allowed to do what they damn well please. I'm not a lawyer, but there are established rules governoring evidence.

3. PAPINYC

Posts: 2315; Member since: Jul 30, 2011

Lucy, me love you loooooong time (baby)!

19. StringCheese01

Posts: 64; Member since: Jan 27, 2012

She a h0e

33. MISTER_H

Posts: 97; Member since: Jul 08, 2012

There much better than rotten fruit.

59. ardent1

Posts: 2000; Member since: Apr 16, 2011

Thanks for that racist remark.

4. pkiran1996

Posts: 166; Member since: Oct 22, 2011

This Judge is clearly incompetent and biased in Apple's favour. How can you refuse to let a defendant show evidence? Her arrogance is disgraceful.

5. SonyFTW2020

Posts: 311; Member since: May 03, 2012

The devil dont sleep.........But when a pebble is droped into a pond you can not stop the ripples from rippling out once it is droped... In other words the truth will get out one way or the other and its effects will be more gradient than that of the attempts to conceal to try and conceal it.

6. PhoneArenaUser

Posts: 5498; Member since: Aug 05, 2011

Ok, bye bye, PhoneArena.com mates, I'm tired and going to sleep, no more judge Koh...

8. jaafar2k

Posts: 18; Member since: Oct 14, 2011

Samsung has zero chance in this court They are going to loss this case F****** judge

9. jmoita2

Posts: 930; Member since: Dec 23, 2011

Judge iKoh is definitely NOT a looker...lol!!!

17. thedarkside

Posts: 654; Member since: Apr 30, 2012

no shes not. we have proven to me, that the force is strong within you. someday you will make a superb leader of the sith.

10. structureman116

Posts: 142; Member since: Sep 14, 2010

Because she clearly has a favorite in this BS case!!!

11. master0fursinz

Posts: 104; Member since: Apr 26, 2010

i hate how she just outright said no to them showing their own F700 which came out long before and had out before the iphone. this judge is crazy.

21. 14545

Posts: 1835; Member since: Nov 22, 2011

She has basically blocked them from defending themselves, and is clearly not impartial in this case. They(samsung) have more restrictions on their defense than any defendant in history. That would be like telling an alleged murderer that he can't use a video of the murder as evidence of his innocence. There only hope is an appeal after apple wins.

26. master0fursinz

Posts: 104; Member since: Apr 26, 2010

they should pull out the oldies and show off the i700 windows mobile series. they were all large screens and buttons that slimmed down to what we now have today.

30. 14545

Posts: 1835; Member since: Nov 22, 2011

Their, not there. I had a temporary brain fart.

72. jmoita2

Posts: 930; Member since: Dec 23, 2011

True that. She would be a superb judge at a Soviet style trial... wait, this is it!!!

* 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 https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.