To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
My point is simply that your outburst focuses purely on the fact the evidence in question wasn't allowed to be used in the case, or as you put it:
"Ah, yeah, those designs that were thrown out of court. Riiight! The ones Samsung then got a tounge-lashing from the judge for when they leaked them to the press. The judge that Samsung apologists claim is biased, even though she refused both evidence..."
Your argument suggests that the evidence is somehow false and/or malicious but it was simply submitted too late for it to be considered during the case. You appear to have deliberately left this crucial detail out to make a false point.
For those not in the legal profession, looking from the outside; that evidence is still very much relevant to getting an idea of how much Samsung based their handsets on the iPhone.
BTW, demanding balance while making disingenuous statements is often seen as hypercritical and undermines your claims.
Again - what is the edidence if not false/questionable if presented so far down the line. It was released to the public to sway opinion in their favour. They didn't do it because they were trying to help people understand, they did I'd to play dirty. Just like Apple, who then tried to get te case closed in their favour because of the disclosure.





Member since:
2006-05-30
Yes - she threw then out. It was widely publicised. She then also then tore a strip off of Samsung for making those details public to the press. These are both facts. Your point? If the evidence was so vital as they claim, why did they bring it up so late in the process? Desperation and playing dirty. Samsung are not the innocent party in this. Neither are.