Apple Asks Court To Sanction Samsung; Samsung Fires Back; More iPhone Prototypes

djl4570 writes "Samsung released to the press documents that had been excluded by Judge Lucy Koh. According to Samsung 'The judge's exclusion of evidence on independent creation meant that even though Apple was allowed to inaccurately argue to the jury that the F700 was an iPhone copy, Samsung was not allowed to tell the full story...The excluded evidence would have established beyond doubt that Samsung did not copy the iPhone design,' An article at another site described judge Lucy Koh as 'Livid.' The defendant released exculpatory evidence that had been suppressed by the judge. This after many stories in the tech press portray the case as Samsung versus Lucy Koh instead of Samsung versus Apple." An anonymous reader sent in Groklaw's detailed take on the spat. Related to the trial, colinneagle sent in more info revealed about iPhone prototypes. One early design would have featured shaped glass, but materials weren't up to spec at the time.

Comments

Re:Only if the Jury violates her orders

[Deorus]

The jury is not supposed to view evidence or information about the trial unless presented within the bounds defined by the judge. You are implying that the actions Samsung took could cause the jury to change their decision but for them to do so they would have to have already violated the judges own rules thereby imperiling the case.

Samsung has violated those rules, they brought up the subject in the courtroom.