Samsung's star lawyer justifies his decision to share evidence with the public, Apple wants heads to roll

Samsung's star lawyer justifies his decision to share evidence with the public, Apple wants heads to roll
Apple filed an emergency motion yesterday with Judge Lucy Koh, demanding that Samsung be sanctioned over the slideshow press leak the other day

The judge previously requested that Samsung's star counsel John Quinn file a brief explaining who leaked the info she didn't want included in the trial, to the press.

John Quinn has filed such a brief yesterday, arguing that the evidence released to the press is "ethical" and "legal", and not meant to sway the jury in any way. He is citing the public nature of the case and the 1st Amendment:

via AppleInsider
Quinn Declaration



28. joey_sfb

Posts: 6794; Member since: Mar 29, 2012

'Apple wants heads to roll', to score a 'Fatality Flawless Victory' by sanctioning Samsung With iKoh, Apple has the whole game in their hands.

21. paulyyd

Posts: 340; Member since: Jan 08, 2011

usually when you disobey a judge, you should be punished, I don't see how this case is any different

22. hulumanu

Posts: 11; Member since: Jul 26, 2012

I don't think Samsung disobeyed Judge Koh at all. As counsel stated all information "leaked" to the public was already out in the public.... Just because Judge Koh will not allow all relevant information to be presented in her courtroom, it does not preclude Samsung from defending itself in the court of public opinion. If the information that Samsung "leaked" in the slideshow is in fact false information or was brought to light only in discovery for this case - that is another story for a another courtroom as Judge Koh (Apple) does not want to bring it into this one. Bottom line is, according to Samsung, the information was out in the public already and could have easily been found by any paralegal, Samsung just packaged it up.

23. AstronautJones

Posts: 305; Member since: Aug 01, 2012

If you read the article, you would have seen that he didn't disobey the judge.

13. whysoserious

Posts: 318; Member since: Jul 20, 2012

Disapproves the use of the slideshow as an evidence on the court, gets pissed off and imposes sanction when it was leaked in the media. - Judge Koh trolling lvl: 99

12. marchels14 unregistered

apple and judge koh both are trying to bring Samsung down i wont be surprised that apple will win. the articles i have read the judge hasn't done thinning in favor of Samsung just apple.looks suspicious.

29. zhypher_23

Posts: 195; Member since: Jun 04, 2012

They should change the judge already, this trial is getting out of hand already from the favors that Apple are gaining from iKoh, it's just insane.

11. darkvadervip

Posts: 366; Member since: Dec 08, 2010

You all are blind as hell but just wait. When google testifies against Samsung and admit it was a copy then what you all going to say. Oh it's predictable" apple paid off google". It's a trip how y'all love android but even in detail writings google saw the design and told them not to do it. But you know Sammy its all about the money. I'm just wondering why HTC don't sue Samsung over them copying sense with touch wiz but you all not going to point that out no time soon.

16. taunjaswenson

Posts: 13; Member since: Jul 30, 2012 you think that Google, the makers of Android, are going to take the stand and testify AGAINST the biggest seller of Android devices, while defending its biggest competitor (Apple)?!?!?! I don't even know what to say to that... except, i hope you patent that crazy idea before Apple decides to say they thought it first!!

17. phitch

Posts: 214; Member since: Mar 06, 2012

So, Samsung has evidence that they developed their F700 in 2006 before the iPhone. In your mind this is somehow Samsung copying the iPhone. So, if your case is going to revolve around this: Why didn't Apple sue LG for producing phones that look very similar as well? Is maybe because the LG Prada came to market first?

20. hulumanu

Posts: 11; Member since: Jul 26, 2012

IMHO anything Google said in the past or what Google testifies now is moot. The core of this trial has to do with patents and what is patentable. The US patent office will patent ANYTHING and leave up to the courts to figure it out if the patent is valid. Google may have told Samsung what their OPINION was of the course that Samsung was taking, but Samsung probably already knew what Google was trying to convey, and felt they had grounds to continue anyway. Googles opinion back then and now does not matter.. what matters is how the court feels right now. Google should not even be brought into this mess.....

10. Angkor

Posts: 108; Member since: Jul 05, 2012

Why Apple wanted to block it? Since Apple has Judge Koh as their supporter.

9. willard12 unregistered

Judge Koh didn't even order the evidence to be sealed and she is upset. Yet, Apple releases all of their theories to CNN and that's OK with her. Too bad Apple is allowed to play by a different set of rules.

6. anywherehome

Posts: 971; Member since: Dec 13, 2011

1) Apple lies about who was the first 2) Samsung has 100 % proof that he had almost the same design before iPhone 3) judge denies the proof 4) Samsung wants to show Apple's lies and publish the 100 % proof 5) apple wants to punish the leak of the proof to hide his lies this is really what the world wants? rotten world has rotten companies (Apple) and rotten judges (Koh)

8. Zayuh24

Posts: 149; Member since: Nov 21, 2011

I was thinking the same thing. It baffles me how this case is progressing. And if Koh still wants to play her evil hand, Samsung will appeal her decision (yet again), get it overturned, and go on their way.

18. ardent1

Posts: 2000; Member since: Apr 16, 2011

> Apple lies about who was the first Except the fact that Apple has the patents, something the green camp keep forgetting. Remember, a number of courts around the world have adjudicated in favor of Apple and against Samsung. Again, another fact the green camp keeps forgetting. Remember, Apple has succeeded in getting Samsung products removed from the markets due to patent infringement. Again, another fact the green camp keeps forgetting. Samsung is NOT without sin. Samsung is no Snow White.

24. hulumanu

Posts: 11; Member since: Jul 26, 2012

Yes, Apple does have the patent, that is not in dispute. The question is.. Is it a valid patent? The US PTO seems to award patents to anyone with the intent to allow the US Courts to handle any disputes on them. That is what this trial is all about.... And, there have been other courts around the world that have adjudicated in favor of Samsung as well. What happens in the US is based solely on the parameters as they pertain to the US, not anywhere else. That, again, is what this trial is all about....

25. Techvue

Posts: 14; Member since: Jul 25, 2012

Agree, many of Apple's patents are old patent + "on a cell phone" But because cell phones have moved beyond items meant for only making phone calls, such patents might be overturned: i.e. Multi-touch gestures, tap to zoom, etc. These were all established in the industry before Apple added them to a phone. What Apple is really trying to claim is that they are the only ones allowed to transfer technology to a cell phone - and they are not. The patents should be overturned.

27. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

there have been as many times where the judge has come down against apple as with apple. The win/loss percentage isnt in apple's favor.. its pretty even to slighly against apple. Having a "patent" in the broken US patent system doesnt automatically make you the inventor. You know very well that there are patents out there awarded to multiple people over the same thing. Part of this court case is actually challenging Apple's right to have those patents. The Sony-Jony and F-700 were major nukes to apple's claim of "first, and thus rightful patent holder". If the jury rules against apple for that, they are basically invalidating apple's claim on the patents as well.

33. cheetah2k

Posts: 2341; Member since: Jan 16, 2011

Whats the quickest way to nullify a patent? Its called PRIOR ART!

2. easymomo

Posts: 91; Member since: Jul 04, 2012

I'm not somebody who loves plot theory and see plot everywhere but Koh, really really is making me change my mind.

1. hung2900

Posts: 966; Member since: Mar 02, 2012

That's why Koh was angry. She didn't want it to happen but no way for her to prevent it.

4. Aeires unregistered

So it was legal this whole time, can't wait to read the comments from the fruit camp. Some people can't accept the concept of parallel developments, three different companies developing similar phones at the same time. Just sad 1 of them thinks only they are allowed basic generic shapes.

14. Droid_X_Doug

Posts: 5993; Member since: Dec 22, 2010

There is sufficient judicial error at this point to give Sammy plenty of reason for an appeal. I suspect this latest iteration is more an effort to play a mind game with Apple's legal team. It would seem to be succeeding. Memo to Apple - the truth shall set you free.

32. cheetah2k

Posts: 2341; Member since: Jan 16, 2011

All of this just makes Koh look fcuking stupid.. She obviously didn't learn from the last over-ruling..

* 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