Koh already rules against Samsung; objection to video on patents overruled

posted by Alan F. / Mar 30, 2014, 8:43 PM

Koh already rules against Samsung; objection to video on patents overruled

On Saturday, we told you about Samsung's objection to a video made for jurors called "How patents work." The video, which was produced to help members of a jury understand the complex world of patent law, contained images of certain Apple devices. During this portion of the video, the narrator talks about how the disclosure of a patent could "inspire new inventions." Samsung's objection was that the placement of Apple's devices on the video "strongly suggests that Apple's products are innovative and patentable."

Now, on the eve of the second patent trial between Samsung and Apple, Judge Lucy Koh has overruled Samsung's objection of the video. The Korean manufacturer argued that the video would be "highly prejudicial" since it would show Apple's devices on a video about patents. Apple, on the other hand, wants the jury to see the 17 minute clip. During the first trial, the jurors saw a similar video, but it was so dated that it probably was created before Apple was a household name.

The jury hasn't been selected, and already Sammy is 0-1 on objections.

Last year's Jury saw a dated video from the days before Apple was a household name

source: AppleInsider

FEATURED VIDEO

Options

54 Comments

1. zekes

Posts: 230; Member since: Aug 14, 2012

Samsung y u so dumb -_-

posted on Mar 30, 2014, 8:50 PM 8

16. blingblingthing

Posts: 946; Member since: Oct 23, 2012

4 likes for this comment?

posted on Mar 30, 2014, 10:02 PM 7

18. PapaSmurf

Posts: 10457; Member since: May 14, 2012

That jury looks as if they've stepped out of the 90's...

posted on Mar 30, 2014, 10:04 PM 17

26. Miracles

Posts: 560; Member since: Aug 31, 2013

Better that way....no bias lol

posted on Mar 31, 2014, 12:15 AM 2

45. Finalflash

Posts: 4063; Member since: Jul 23, 2013

They are easily influenced by self interested idiots like that one guy in the previous jury. They really need to get knowledgeable people in juries instead of random people.

posted on Mar 31, 2014, 4:27 AM 0

22. rd_nest

Posts: 1656; Member since: Jun 06, 2010

You look weird, totally out of place.

posted on Mar 30, 2014, 10:40 PM 0

40. Ashoaib

Posts: 3276; Member since: Nov 15, 2013

Overruling is obvious bcoz objection was made by samsung not apple

posted on Mar 31, 2014, 1:59 AM 0

51. InspectorGadget80 unregistered

Judge koh y you're so dumb.

posted on Mar 31, 2014, 5:21 PM 0

2. AfterShock

Posts: 4146; Member since: Nov 02, 2012

They's cooked. Not much hope of no bias.

posted on Mar 30, 2014, 8:54 PM 11

7. Sauce unregistered

I see what you did there.

posted on Mar 30, 2014, 9:14 PM 2

3. blingblingthing

Posts: 946; Member since: Oct 23, 2012

I'm not against the video. I'm against apple being included in it. This will likely only lead a juror to think apple and patents to hand in hand. Use something else like maybe IBM or Microsoft getting a patent for something.

posted on Mar 30, 2014, 8:55 PM 15

8. joey_sfb

Posts: 6794; Member since: Mar 29, 2012

I think the US legal system is flawed and bias if they show apple devices on a court instructions video. Thinks for a moment Samsung has many patents too and should they be shown on any court instructions video? The answer is no as well.

posted on Mar 30, 2014, 9:15 PM 16

11. Sauce unregistered

This would be the same thing if Apple were in a Korean court, with a Korean jury. There would be a video showing Samsung. It's home field advantage. Don't fight in court if you can't handle it lol.

posted on Mar 30, 2014, 9:22 PM 1

12. blingblingthing

Posts: 946; Member since: Oct 23, 2012

You want a fair fight, you want facts to reign and not a personal allegiances. You don't need apple in the video.

posted on Mar 30, 2014, 9:30 PM 13

14. Sauce unregistered

In the corporate world, there are no things as fair fights. This isn't the 8th grade playground. Welcome to the real world.

posted on Mar 30, 2014, 9:43 PM 2

24. DigitalJedi_X2

Posts: 346; Member since: Jan 30, 2012

But this takes place in a court of law. Where its supposed to be fair and impartial . A court of law is not the corporate world.

posted on Mar 30, 2014, 11:49 PM 8

25. clothnapkin

Posts: 1; Member since: Mar 30, 2014

This is not the corporate world. And Judge Koh's actions are extremely questionable. Imagine a murder trial, with an African-American defendant. Now imagine the jury being forced to watch a video explaining the actual qualifications for murder and the suspect on the video is African-American. In what justice system would this make sense? Not in the United States. How is this not being seriously looked at? This is a pretty blatant act of injustice and I have not seen something this outlandish in a while.

posted on Mar 30, 2014, 11:55 PM 6

27. PBXtech

Posts: 1032; Member since: Oct 21, 2013

Too bad both sides are acting like it's a kindergarten playground.

posted on Mar 31, 2014, 12:15 AM 0

13. willard12 unregistered

I guess a hypothetical wrong makes a right.

posted on Mar 30, 2014, 9:35 PM 8

28. joey_sfb

Posts: 6794; Member since: Mar 29, 2012

Sauce its Apple that start the lawsuit. You really believe Apple should be the only player in the mobile phone business? One store to do all your fried chicken, one store for pizza, one for cars..etc. Samsung may appear strong now. Soon someone with better ideas better deals will lead. Open competition ensure a better and fair deal for all consumer.

posted on Mar 31, 2014, 12:34 AM 2

29. Sauce unregistered

Mr. Joey, because someone "started" a law suit, the other side doesn't have to accept. They can pay a settlement fee and move on.

posted on Mar 31, 2014, 12:38 AM 0

30. Taters

Posts: 6474; Member since: Jan 28, 2013

Lol what? So if someone starts a fight you think the other side should let them beat you up and move on? Of course you fight. That is the most retarded thing I have ever heard on phonearena and that is saying a lot.

posted on Mar 31, 2014, 12:46 AM 5

36. Sauce unregistered

29 was a continued response to 11. Example A for the less educated like yourself: Apple came to a settlement with the public against a class action lawsuit against Apple that claimed Apple had revoked rights to fix/support those with water damaged devices. Apples water sensors were faulty and to avoid a big trial and lose a ton of money (AS SAMSUNG IS DOING RIGHT NOW IF THEY LOSE), Apple agreed to a settlement, which comes out cheaper for their pocket.

posted on Mar 31, 2014, 1:02 AM 0

47. Taters

Posts: 6474; Member since: Jan 28, 2013

Speaking of the less educated.....how is that even remotely the same? Apple settled because they know they should and would lose...otherwise they wouldn't settle. In this case there is no way Samsung should lose and all the claims are sketchy. You do not settle in that case. It's common sense. Of course Samsung made a mistake and underestimated the massive US company politics here but in no way they should take it up the ass. I don't know what kind of screwed up world you live in but taking it up the ass is not the educated way. Far from it....lol

posted on Mar 31, 2014, 11:00 AM 1

49. Sauce unregistered

Samsung has been far from winning this fight from the beginning. A couple appeals and continuations but they are already ONE BILLION in debt if this case goes sour for them, which most likely will. Samsung (unlike that Apple example I gave) doesn't think they can lose. It's a d*ck measuring contest with them now and they chose the wrong choice.

posted on Mar 31, 2014, 3:57 PM 0

54. Taters

Posts: 6474; Member since: Jan 28, 2013

The one billion was ridiculous and absolutely makes a farce out of the USA jury/ legal system. Do you honestly believe that the high powered legal team suggested that they settle and Samsung told them to F off? They didn't settle because Apple had no business getting more money than a settlement offer.

posted on Apr 01, 2014, 7:23 AM 0

43. joey_sfb

Posts: 6794; Member since: Mar 29, 2012

+1 on 'that is saying a lot.' LOL!

posted on Mar 31, 2014, 2:44 AM 1

31. Taters

Posts: 6474; Member since: Jan 28, 2013

Except the Korean government was fair to Apple and this court isn't fair to Samsung. Typical US bulls**t.

posted on Mar 31, 2014, 12:47 AM 9

39. stealthd unregistered

South Korea banned all sales of the iPhone (and Blackberry) until 2009. There was no patent dispute, it was solely to protect Korean phone manufacturers like Samsung and LG. Still think that's fair?