Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 18th Dec 2012 14:31 UTC
Legal Lots of news about Apple vs. Samsung (and vice versa) in both the US and Europe today. In the US, judge Koh dealth two blows: one to Samsung (no retrial based on juror misconduct), the other to Apple (no permanent sales ban). In Europe, in the meantime, Samsung announced it will cease all lawsuits injunction requests against Apple... But only in Europe.
Thread beginning with comment 545745
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: Corrupt Court
by Nelson on Tue 18th Dec 2012 20:30 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Corrupt Court"
Nelson
Member since:
2005-11-29

Trials have a clear process, and its the job of the Judge to move the ball forward. Samsung had plenty of time to present the prior art using the correct process to do so, but didn't. That's their bad.

If there were no order in the court, these things would drag on for far longer than they have. If (hypothetically speaking here) just being right were enough to win cases, then lawyers wouldn't need to exist.

Samsung's lawyers should have known better, but didn't. Or so the narrative goes. It could be that they're just raising this issue because they lost.

I'm not completely insensitive to Samsung's requests, but I'm increasingly wary about the demonization of the Jury.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[8]: Corrupt Court
by Alfman on Tue 18th Dec 2012 20:48 in reply to "RE[7]: Corrupt Court"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

Nelson,

"Trials have a clear process, and its the job of the Judge to move the ball forward. Samsung had plenty of time to present the prior art using the correct process to do so, but didn't. That's their bad."

Actually I think they did, but the judge barred it? I don't have the energy to continue our debate, I'm just going to try to agree to disagree. Great, this saves us a lot of time doesn't it?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[9]: Corrupt Court
by jared_wilkes on Tue 18th Dec 2012 21:05 in reply to "RE[8]: Corrupt Court"
jared_wilkes Member since:
2011-04-25

Wrong. Why even claim the contrary in the form of a question? They attempted to submit it way past stated deadlines said they could do so.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[9]: Corrupt Court
by Nelson on Tue 18th Dec 2012 21:23 in reply to "RE[8]: Corrupt Court"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

No, like the Juror selection, Samsung royally screwed up the entire process of presenting evidence and submitted it way, way, way past their deadline.

A Judge has to balance between the process of the trial and what the law is. That's their job. It happens every day in the US.

Evidence is ruled out on technicalities every day (For a real good one, look into the exclusionary rule with warrantless searches. You could find a room full of dead bodies and I could be red handed, but if the evidence is obtained illegally its inadmissible)

Reply Parent Score: 2