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 545776
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
TemporalBeing
Member since:
2007-08-22

"How so?


Your claim is that this was anticipated because the judge is making decisions based on a predetermined proportional measurement. This is pure delusion. Even a legitimately, corrupt judge working illegally to benefit one party isn't stupid enough to use a ratio to make rulings. You have to be the biggest fool in the world to believe that anyone else would believe that such an argument is widely held. I don't even know someone who generally agrees with you on prinicple who thinks this was aniticipated based on some past ratio of rulings. This is how stupid and foolish your justifications are.
"

I never said she set out to do a certain ratio. Only that that there is a ratio that significantly favors Apple.

People widely believed this would be overturned because it is difficult to overturn a jury verdict and there has been very little evidence presented by Samsung to suggest that they could ever get anyone to overturn this verdict.


Yes, it is difficult to overturn a jury verdict. However, there has been enough said and enough evidence presented to call the verdict into question - a question that can only be answered through a new trial.

"It's been widely known for a long time that the Judge has been favoring Apple in her decisions.


Nonsense. Apple-haters, patent-haters, Florian-Mueller-haters, and self-deluded groklaw-lovers have fooled themselves into believing so. By no means is this a widely held opinion.
"

Let's see:

Florian Mueller is one of the biggest FUD producers out there that has pretty much gotten everything wrong about any trial he ever wrote about. He doesn't have a very good track record when it comes to reading courts, and has an obvious bias through being paid by Oracle and Microsoft - usually not revealing so until forced to admit it.

Groklaw - currently being recognized as one of the top 100 law blogs, one of the top 10 technology law blogs, by ABA Journal (http://www.abajournal.com/blawg100).

Hmmm...I think I'll go with Groklaw.

Reply Parent Score: 3

jared_wilkes Member since:
2011-04-25

I never said she set out to do a certain ratio. Only that that there is a ratio that significantly favors Apple.


However, you want to phrase it, I will reiterate: that is a nonsensical and not widely held view.

Yes, it is difficult to overturn a jury verdict. However, there has been enough said and enough evidence presented to call the verdict into question - a question that can only be answered through a new trial.


In your opinion. However, it is not a widely held view that there is enough to question the verdict. The majority opinion is that the verdict will likely stand because Samsung lacks the arguments and evidence to overturn a jury verdict.

Florian Mueller is one of the biggest FUD producers out there that has pretty much gotten everything wrong about any trial he ever wrote about. He doesn't have a very good track record when it comes to reading courts, and has an obvious bias through being paid by Oracle and Microsoft - usually not revealing so until forced to admit it.


Again, your opinion. I can easily argue that Florian has been more correct than PJ. I would further argue that PJ has generally been wrong about what Florian has or has not claimed -- i.e. she has been FUDing herself.

I wholly acknowledge that Florian is biased. I do this with all sources of information. However, I evaluate and judge their evidence and arguments on my own irrespective of their source. Maybe you should do the same with respect to Groklaw?

Groklaw - currently being recognized as one of the top 100 law blogs, one of the top 10 technology law blogs, by ABA Journal (http://www.abajournal.com/blawg100).

Hmmm...I think I'll go with Groklaw.


A bunch of groklaw fans voted in an online poll. Woopty-doo.

Reply Parent Score: 2

TemporalBeing Member since:
2007-08-22

"Groklaw - currently being recognized as one of the top 100 law blogs, one of the top 10 technology law blogs, by ABA Journal (http://www.abajournal.com/blawg100).

Hmmm...I think I'll go with Groklaw.


A bunch of groklaw fans voted in an online poll. Woopty-doo.
"

You do realize that Groklaw fans could not simply get Groklaw into that list as they have little to do with ABA Journal. Rather ABA Journal first selected Groklaw for that list based on the quality of the material at Groklaw in their opinion - one that more reflects the legal community than merely Groklaw "fans".

Reply Parent Score: 2

ichi Member since:
2007-03-06


"Groklaw - currently being recognized as one of the top 100 law blogs, one of the top 10 technology law blogs, by ABA Journal (http://www.abajournal.com/blawg100).

Hmmm...I think I'll go with Groklaw.


A bunch of groklaw fans voted in an online poll. Woopty-doo.
"

As biased as Groklaw might be in their conclusions they do a nice work attending trials and posting official documentation rather than just jumping to their own opinions like *cough*fosspatents*cough* plenty of other blogs do.

That alone warrants IMO recognition as a law blog, even if you don't agree with PJ's interpretation of the presented docs.

Reply Parent Score: 2