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.'"

2 of 354 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Samsung should be thanked by Theaetetus · · Score: 5, Informative

    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?

    If Samsung can spring surprise evidence on the other side on the eve of trial, having withheld it during months and months of required disclosure and discovery, then what point is there for due process? The federal courts don't actually work the way you see in Boston Legal.

  2. Re:Samsung can't release it's OWN designs?!? by Missing.Matter · · Score: 5, Informative

    You're both confused because there are two separate issues here (notice the word "also" in the quote you pasted)

    Issue 1) Samsung wants to show it had designs of iPhone-like phones predating the iPhone. In particular the designs predating the F700, which is a Samsung Phone
    Issue 2) Samsung wants to show that Apple looked toward others, i.e. Sony for inspiration on the iPhone. This would be what you quoted.

    Samsung wasn't allowed to do this in trial, so they sent out a bunch of slides (linked here) to the press which do the same, and the Judge is mad at that.