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 545779
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
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

jared_wilkes Member since:
2011-04-25

They got on the final list via online poll (i.e. useless); they were selected for consideration because the audience of one of the very few technology/law blogs is certainly the loudest.

I see no evidence that the ABA selection proves that PJ is more correct than Florian or that groklaw is free of FUD or errors.

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

jared_wilkes Member since:
2011-04-25

I agree: Groklaw does do a great job of assembling publicly available documents, gathering comments by its audience members who are able to attend, and/or pointing to some other coverage. I do not see PJ abstaining from providing an opinion, find her opinion not well-supported by law, find her arguments, generally and legally, completed flawed and marred by her personal bias, and quite often she has been wrong of late.

For months now, she's been handwaving and pointing, going: "Look, look, don't you see. This proves that Apple is lying and evil and must be destroyed and will lose... and even if they don't lose, everything will definitely be overturned in the end because they are evil, their patents aren't valid! The judge is corrupt, inept, duped by Apple's deception, in bed with Apple, just protecting the American company, a complete fool who will assuredly be overturned, clearly favoring Apple, clearly out for Samsung! Samsung is being denied justice! She's denying them at every turn (not for perfectly valid and common legal decisions that would likely be applied by any other judge) but because she has it out for them! Look, look here's proof that the jury foreman lied in open court, did so intentionally because nearly 20 years ago he was canned by Seagate and now Samsung owns less than 10% of Seagate so he has it out for them, and he's a criminal, completely lied to the judge and all the other jury members and he got them to all change their minds and forget their own obligations to uphold the law and their own understandings of what the law is, it must have been mind control, in fact, he didn't even let them vote, he filled out all the ballots himself." (Of course, a very much overbroad and exaggerated generalization, but you get the gist. Don't misinterpret my hyperbole as attempting to accurately present her -- I am merely trying to avoid cutting and pasting literally hundreds of comments in order to paint a picture...)

I look at what she writes and what she sees as obvious, and I only see the law playing out as it has been, not her fantasy world. For the most part, the primary thing coming out of groklaw these days is unsupported FUD... and they do do a bangup job of collecting publicly available documents. (Of course, these days my PDF viewers and other sources of information are better than her old school, open source site presentation and speed to posting. But I am a stickler for completeness so there is some appreciation.)

Edited 2012-12-19 01:16 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2