Slashdot Mirror
Samsung Admonished For Releasing Rejected Evidence
New submitter zaphod777 writes with an update on Samsung's release of info on pre-iPhone designs. It seems the additional information released relating to the F700 was actually rejected from the trial, and the judge isn't too happy: "Samsung has already appealed the rulings denying the evidence, but that didn't stop the company's lawyers from trying again today after Apple briefly showed the F700 on a slide during its opening statements. Claiming that Apple had 'opened the door' to discussion of the F700, Samsung asked the court to reconsider. That didn't go so well with Judge Koh, who noted that 'Samsung has filed like 10 motions for reconsideration,' and asked Samsung lead attorney John Quinn to sit back down. At one point in the exchange Quinn told Koh that he was 'begging the court,' and desperately asked 'what's the point in having a trial?' — but Koh simply wasn't buying it. 'Don't make me sanction you,' she said. 'Please.'"
WTF? The summary should have made it more clear that these are pre-iPhone *Samsung* designs, showing pretty clearly that they were considering very iPhone-like designs before the iPhone had even released. It's the cornerstone of Samsung's case that Apple didn't invent the idea of a rectangular phone with a touchscreen and that they had been developing the same design idea at the time.
Not sure how a judge can prohibit someone from releasing their own designs. But, then, gag orders have a long history of infringing on areas that would clearly otherwise be considered free speech, and judges have a long history of abusing them.
What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
for showing what a mockery the courts make of the law so they can arrive at their predetermined ruling.
If evidence that supports the defense is excluded then I have to agree with the attorney for Samsung as to what point is there for a trial?
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
...when the judge was on the bench playing around on her iPhone. And had been spotted saving a spot waiting for the iPhone 5.
Guess the judge is owned by Apple or has some interest in keeping them happy
I don't really care that much how the trial pans out... But I do care about the fact that it seems like this trial is hurting my choices as a consumer. I like choice. From what I can see Apple is trying reeeeally hard to show that they should own a bunch of really nice UI ideas. Or that a touchscreen filling most of the user facing side of the phone is their idea? Frankly, the whole thing seems ridiculous.
Recently I've been looking at buying an IP67-grade Android phone. AFAIK Apple has no plans to make the iPhone waterproof and dustproof. So if Apple has it's way either I buy a UI-crippled phone, or an iPhone which doesn't fit my requirements?
Legislation should exist to benefit society, not to maximize profits for a select few corporate entities.
.: Max Romantschuk
Despite what device you think is better, this is a homegrown good ol' USA free market enterprise vs. cold, emotionless communist giant. Samsung never had a chance.
Quinn told Koh that he was 'begging the court,' and desperately asked 'what's the point in having a trial?' — but Koh simply wasn't buying it. 'Don't make me sanction you,' she said. 'Please.'
Somehow I see a future Rule 34 submission for this interchange.
*scampers to collect brain from gutter*
The trial is a circus and both sides are a joke.
Nah, I'd rather just plain think. It's quite good, try it sometimes.
I much prefer the amateur http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calvin_and_Hobbes version.
Typical Apple fanboy, the one who kept evidence hidden for months was Apple in this case, making it impossible for Samsung to get this evidence any earlier. As can be read clearly in Samsungs appeal. Mind you, facts never get in the way of an Apple fanboy.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
In the US, it is up to the jury to decide who is right. Not the judge.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
From TFA:
One of these phones (the bottom-right one) became the Samsung F700 - a product Apple once included as an infringing product, but later withdrew once it learned Samsung created it and brought it to market before the iPhone
It seems the F700 was a Samsung design. Is the article incorrect in this claim?
Apple had already established it's iPhone design and has images of such from 2005. This unfulfilled prototype was from 2006.
From the article again:
This is what Samsung was considering putting to market in the summer of 2006, six months before the unveiling of the iPhone.
It would seem reasonable to assume that if they were considering putting it to market in 2006, they would have had the design well before then. The article is lacking in enough details on the dates to determine who which was actually first, but the first quote above implies that Apple thought the F700 predated the iPhone
A little know finnish start-up made in 2003 a motion controlled touchscreen smartphone. Combine that with Samsung's designs and you get an iPhonish thing.
There are far more options than you profess here.
For example, someone COULD be an apple shill and decide for them, right? This is a possibility, right?
Now, someone could disagree with Android and not be a shill, since this is not precluded by the OP, right?
And if someone were an apple shill, they WOULD profess a predestined belief in apple's correctness, right?
In this case, it may be just that the judge is slavishly following the patent office, which whilst not being an apple shill, STILL makes the actions of the judge wrong, right?
But, troll, for others in the audience, let's examine your alleged point:
Typical Apple fanboy, the one who kept evidence hidden for months was Apple in this case, making it impossible for Samsung to get this evidence any earlier. As can be read clearly in Samsungs appeal. Mind you, facts never get in the way of an Apple fanboy.
Last I checked, the F700 was a Samsung phone. You're claiming that Apple hid Samsung's own product history from them, making it impossible for Samsung to get it any earlier. Why exactly should we find you credible about anything?
obviously the FBI should look int any relationships that the judge or the familiars of the judge have with Apple, especially the banking and stock ownerships that there may be
The summary missed what is probably the most important line of the article:
"The Apple vs. Samsung trial was always destined to be a circus, "
It's clear that neither Apple nor Samsung is going to look good PR wise after all is said and done.
So the question becomes, who will get screwed over the hardest? Right now I'm betting on Samsung, simply because Apple has way more... um... "thermonuclear" experience.
I don't understand. The trial isn't about whether Samsung copied Apple. It's not about the morals or ethics of copying. It's about whether Samsung violated Apple's utility and design patents. While the focus on copying is relevant to the design patents, even then, this shouldn't be about moral questions. If Samsung decided to copy Apple, it doesn't matter. IANAL but I saw this with the iPad design patent trial in Germany too and I couldn't understand. The trial should be about the patent. And the iPad design patent shows a fat tablet that looks nothing like any iPad. So I never understood how Samsung could have been found to have violated that patent. Similarly, for Apple's utility patents, the software patents, the trial should be focused on the validity and violation of the patents, namely prior art and the 'obviousness' and patentability of the patents, and whether Samsung actually infringes on them.
If it turns out that Samsung has to pay a few million even a few hundred million to Apple to Apple for the iPhone design patent violated by the Galaxy S, it won't affect things much. While I still feel that would be a case of the legal system going overboard, Samsung clearly did copy many aspects of the iPhone design. But as the Galaxy S 2 and S 3 look nothing like any iPhone, it shouldn't affect any current products. Samsung can afford to pay that much and Apple has more money than it knows what to do with. Whereas if Apple win on one of the software patents that would be a terrifying outcome that would be followed by preliminary injunctions blocking virtually all Android phones in the U.S. This isn't a moral crusade. If Samsung copied Apple and Apple still lose, well boohoo, it wouldn't make the list of the top one million horrible things that happened in the world that day.
It's not about being morally right or wrong. Not just the coverage, but so much of the testimony and evidence and court proceedings seem to focus on that. And this judge is an ignorant nutcase, who ordered a preliminary injunction before a trial to ban the Galaxy Nexus from the United Status. Yes, she decided that having a common search for local and web items is a valid patent, is clearly violated, and having that violated harms Apple's business much more than having the GN banned would harm consumers. I would love to see Apple get that reasoning past Posner. At least make them win in a goddam trial, does she even understand she will be fundamentally undermining the market dynamics of the fastest growing, emerging area of technology in the world and handing the market to Apple on a platter with bans like those, and if that is really justified by a dubious patent?
Maybe that should judge should learn how court cases work before she presides over this case. If they say XXXXX cannot be administered as evidence and then you show it anyway, you instantly land somewhere between a mistrial and losing the case. I can think of several criminal cases that were instantly done and over with because the prosecution mentioned something about the defendant that was specifically not allowed as evidence. Like if someone was on trial for being a serial killer and they deemed it not admissible that their previous occupation was a butcher in a deli because that's not really a fair correlation and then the prosecution tells the jury that they used to be a butcher, the trial is over. That's not even up to the judge, that's the law.
Apple brought up the F700 in their testamony. This wasn't part of the brief that Samsung had been given. This therefore means that now that it has been brought up, Samsung needs to counter it. With, for example, their designs for the F700.
This is standard court rule.
A bit suspicious yes. However, on the other hand if the phones precede Apple's dominance in the arena (or really, even their presence), why would anyone be "copying" them?
Samsung's attorneys failed to produce the evidence about the design of the F700 during the discovery period. This is in spite of it being around for several years before the lawsuit was even filed by Apple. By holding it back until just before the trial, Apple's counsel didn't get the time to investigate the evidence and prepare their responses. Because we have an adversarial legal system, one in which two parties fighting over the truth before an independent jury, it's important that the rules guarantee both parties a fair fight.
Judge Koh decided that holding back that evidence until after discovery broke the rules required for a fair fight, especially considering that 1) Samsung had the evidence available for years, and 2) if the evidence is actually the smoking gun that they claim, it should have been presented during discovery to give Apple the right to examine it and prepare a response. I think this was a reasonable decision by the judge. To be fair, consider how you would have reacted if the roles had been reversed and Apple had tried to introduce such important evidence so late.
All that said, and knowing how some lawyers can be, I suspect the evidence is being overblown by the Samsung attorney because he wants a path to appeal. Improperly denied evidence could give rise to an entire retrial. But I suspect:
Combined with the evidence destruction by Samsung, they've really been screwing this one up.
Boom Shanka
What you don't understand is that -every- trial also involves questions or morality in the form of also judging the law itself. Jurors have the ability to reject laws which they deem to be unconscionable, and that right has been upheld for literally centuries in English and American common law.
It shouldn't be a surprise that judges find this concept to be very undermining and try to suppress it at all times, so it's not shocking that you're not familiar with it. Check out FIJA for more background.
I've done that. The result was that I bought an Android phone.
Maybe you should help out Samsung then. They seem to be short on thinking through their actions.
The Sony device Samsung claims inspired Apple's iPhone Yet the myth will be dragged to light for years by the fandroids.
The outcome of this case is painfully obvious -- I don't understand why there's so much debate about it...
From patents to SOPA to the *AAs running the Justice Dept. and every little thing in-between, the "new economy" of the United States is a particular dystopian capitalistic view of the "information age".
Apple is the poster child of this movement. Like a Babe Ruth of it's time... like a blue-ribbon apple pie... Apple is the epitome of American elitism expressed as a company.
They can't lose. Not right now. Not on home turf. Not until after a critical mass of the planet's governments stop buying into the dystopian vision.
patent != copyright. If we both invented the transistor, but I patent it, too bad, I get to control your usage of it.
I believe this trial will end in "verdict by grace of God". The verdict has been already made on Steve Jobs and the rest Apple leadership will follow, because God is just and he is the ultimate judge of all matters earthly and heavenly. Health, life and death are like grains of sand in His mighty hand, what he drops breaks and what he holds up remains standing, forever and ever. The unmatched greed of Apple Inc. is an abomination which rivals the immorality of ancient Rome, Sodom and Gomorra, which all fell. May God have mercy on the little people who work for Apple, hopefully they are not guilty of other sins widesprad in California, like sodomy, so He may spare them. But the big evil executives will become executors of themselves with their vileness that draws heavenly punishment. God will make a tesimony on behalf of the korean people, who are good christians and diligent labourers, as has been commanded in the Genesis. America has been poisoned by the hellish sin of greed for extra profit and is no longer kind before God!
> Legislation should exist to benefit society, not to maximize profits for a select few corporate entities.
In the overpriced farce that the justice system has become it is forgotten that the purpose of the law is to moderate human behavior. Legislation is merely the embodiment of the law. Allowing a few select corporate entities to bully and monopolize disadvantages society.
As you so rightly point out: This is nothing more that sheer greed by Apple trying to monopolize technologies they popularized by did not invent. If common sense were to prevail the judge would throw this case out, but these lawyers and the judges can't see the forest for the trees.
Check out the Innocence Project.
In the US people get executed even when there is physical proof that somebody else did it.
Judges with bias persue their own crooked agenda.
Many prisons in the US are now run by private owners for profit.
Predictably, more and more judges have been caught accepting trips, gifts and even outright bribes to sentence people to for profit prisons.
Or am I mistaken? And wasn't this decided back in the 80s when Apple sued Microsoft, only to have Xerox sue Apple, in turn, for ripping off PARC?
Isn't there already a precedent set here?
It goes to the validity of the patent.. obviously apple shouldn't have been given patents in the first place for something that is neither original (prior art), or something that is so broad as to describe the way that all touchscreen phones would obviously have to look to perform their function (largest possible screen, rounded corners etc) and which evidence shows that all other handset manufacturers were already heading towards anyway.
You are assuming these patents are valid while Samsung is obviously trying to show they are not.
You're comfortable with such an obviously illegitimate, anticompetitive law?
But it seems Samsung didn't violate anything in releasing the information. In fact, the judge, who is clearly biased towards Apple, made a serious flaw by allowing Apple to mention F700 and tried to cover up the request from Samsung to bring more information on it in the lawsuit.
Regardless of Samsung releasing the information (which makes her look biased, and could get to the jury in one way or another), this will be shredded to pieces in the appeals. The only problem is that it can produce damage, and especially standing bans until the appeal.
Though most recent Samsung devices aren't covered, so it's not going to stop e.g. SG3 or the successor (might deal more damage in the tablet market).
And at least this is limited to the US. Korean judicial system will certainly retaliate, and this will influence other trials around the world.
no I'm not, just to be clear, I think what is going on is ridiculous and is against the original purpose of patents...