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 545801
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 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

ichi Member since:
2007-03-06

PJ is not a law expert (and she clearly states that fact often in her articles). She's biased (it's a blog after all) and tries to find support for her own opinions and expectations from the posted docs, which means she'll quite some times be wrong.

The point though is that at least they present the whole documentation for you to read and draw your own conclusions much unlike Fosspatents, which is another highly biased blog which has proven to be wrong about as often as Groklaw, if not even more.

I'm mentioning Fosspatents because that's the source most media is quoting in their news articles, and not Groklaw.

Reply Parent Score: 2