Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Android The Courts Apple

Samsung Admonished For Releasing Rejected Evidence 354

Posted by Unknown Lamer
from the we-control-the-horizontal dept.
New submitter zaphod777 writes with an update on Samsung's release of info on pre-iPhone designs. It seems the additional information released relating to the F700 was actually rejected from the trial, and the judge isn't too happy: "Samsung has already appealed the rulings denying the evidence, but that didn't stop the company's lawyers from trying again today after Apple briefly showed the F700 on a slide during its opening statements. Claiming that Apple had 'opened the door' to discussion of the F700, Samsung asked the court to reconsider. That didn't go so well with Judge Koh, who noted that 'Samsung has filed like 10 motions for reconsideration,' and asked Samsung lead attorney John Quinn to sit back down. At one point in the exchange Quinn told Koh that he was 'begging the court,' and desperately asked 'what's the point in having a trial?' — but Koh simply wasn't buying it. 'Don't make me sanction you,' she said. 'Please.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Samsung Admonished For Releasing Rejected Evidence

Comments Filter:
  • by crazyjj (2598719) * on Wednesday August 01, 2012 @09:06AM (#40841227)

    WTF? The summary should have made it more clear that these are pre-iPhone *Samsung* designs, showing pretty clearly that they were considering very iPhone-like designs before the iPhone had even released. It's the cornerstone of Samsung's case that Apple didn't invent the idea of a rectangular phone with a touchscreen and that they had been developing the same design idea at the time.

    Not sure how a judge can prohibit someone from releasing their own designs. But, then, gag orders have a long history of infringing on areas that would clearly otherwise be considered free speech, and judges have a long history of abusing them.

  • by Shivetya (243324) on Wednesday August 01, 2012 @09:14AM (#40841303) Homepage Journal

    for showing what a mockery the courts make of the law so they can arrive at their predetermined ruling.

    If evidence that supports the defense is excluded then I have to agree with the attorney for Samsung as to what point is there for a trial?

  • by Max Romantschuk (132276) <max@romantschuk.fi> on Wednesday August 01, 2012 @09:22AM (#40841391) Homepage

    I don't really care that much how the trial pans out... But I do care about the fact that it seems like this trial is hurting my choices as a consumer. I like choice. From what I can see Apple is trying reeeeally hard to show that they should own a bunch of really nice UI ideas. Or that a touchscreen filling most of the user facing side of the phone is their idea? Frankly, the whole thing seems ridiculous.

    Recently I've been looking at buying an IP67-grade Android phone. AFAIK Apple has no plans to make the iPhone waterproof and dustproof. So if Apple has it's way either I buy a UI-crippled phone, or an iPhone which doesn't fit my requirements?

    Legislation should exist to benefit society, not to maximize profits for a select few corporate entities.

  • Re:wtf judge (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 01, 2012 @09:25AM (#40841421)

    Or, you know, the judge is tied by the rules about submitting evidence?

  • by Lumpy (12016) on Wednesday August 01, 2012 @09:27AM (#40841439) Homepage

    Then they need to put their PR machine on it. Smear the judge in the media, smear the whole damn thing. make it exceedingly embarrassing for the judge to do anything but be fair.

    A dirty bought off judge needs to have their character attacked in the public eye, They deserve nothing but contempt.

  • by Lumpy (12016) on Wednesday August 01, 2012 @09:28AM (#40841461) Homepage

    "Politicians are like babies' diapers; they should be changed often, and for the same reason."

    same goes for judges.

  • by crazyjj (2598719) * on Wednesday August 01, 2012 @09:29AM (#40841471)

    Exactly what I mean by abuse. I don't recall an asterisk after the First Amendment leading to:

    * Unless some random judge says you don't have the right to free speech.

    There was a particularly egregious case [cbsnews.com] in Kentucky recently, where a teenage girl was almost charged with contempt (and probably would have been, if not for the press attention), for daring to name her rapists in public.

  • by Joce640k (829181) on Wednesday August 01, 2012 @09:37AM (#40841543) Homepage

    Not sure how a judge can prohibit someone from releasing their own designs.

    Even more unsure how this evidence can be dismissed by a judge. It's important.

    Seems to me like we need a better judge.

  • by Danathar (267989) on Wednesday August 01, 2012 @09:44AM (#40841597) Journal

    Although I agree that Samsung might have been considering iphone like designes before the iphone came out, one has to consider if Samsung's designs were based on what they saw when Apple came to them for manufacturing as opposed to when it was released.

    Samsung would have known the design of the iphone FAR before the release date due to the fact that they had to manufacture it.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 01, 2012 @09:44AM (#40841603)

    Don't try to use actual reasons and logic, it will be lost anyways on the rabid Apple fanboism.

  • by bgat (123664) on Wednesday August 01, 2012 @09:47AM (#40841629) Homepage

    Exactly what I mean by abuse. I don't recall an asterisk after the First Amendment leading to:

    * Unless some random judge says you don't have the right to free speech.

    WTF are you talking about? To suggest that a gag order uniformly constitues "abuse" reveals that you have an anti-understanding of due process and the USA legal system. You are speaking nonsense.

    As for your "egregious" cite, let me assure you that my work with more than one ACTUAL judge at the federal and state levels shows that they are so far above influence by the press, to suggest otherwise will get even the press laughing at you. In the case you mention, the girl clearly violated a Court Order and also well-established law. The judge showed the girl mercy by not charging her with contempt, likely because he didn't want to make her life any more miserable than it already was.

  • by Dishevel (1105119) on Wednesday August 01, 2012 @10:00AM (#40841777)

    It should not matter which was first. The fact that Samsung had this design before they had seen the iPhone design means that they clearly came up with it independently. Patents are broken. They currently serve to do the exact opposite of what they were intended for.

  • "How do we, as consumers, benefit from all this?"

    With patent litigation, the direct answer is that we almost never do, and the system isn't really intended to provide an immediate benefit: it's explicitly a temporary monopoly granted to an inventor, and monopolies (even temporary) generally raise prices and reduce options.

    The theoretical long-term justification is that a patent system incentivizes both innovation and public disclosure of innovations (vs. keeping them as trade secrets), thereby making us all better off in general, with better, cheaper, technology and more options if you view it over a longer timeframe than the timeframe of any one patent.

    I suspect that it often fails to work out that way, though.

  • by moronoxyd (1000371) on Wednesday August 01, 2012 @10:13AM (#40841951)

    Yes. As we now EVERYONE who does not rule in favor of Android MUST BE a pro-Apple shill and paid by them.

    As an AC it is hard to take you serious, but let's jsut try for a minute:

    Samsung tried to enter early designs of their into the trial.
    Even though that seems to be reasonable, the judge did not allow it.

    Later, Apple mentioned these designs during trial.
    Normally, that should open the door for Samsung to talk about these design.
    But no, the judge won't have any of this.

    If it was the other way round, can you honestly say that you wouldn't have doubts whether the judge might be biased in some way?

  • by MrMickS (568778) on Wednesday August 01, 2012 @10:15AM (#40841977) Homepage Journal

    Then they need to put their PR machine on it. Smear the judge in the media, smear the whole damn thing. make it exceedingly embarrassing for the judge to do anything but be fair.

    A dirty bought off judge needs to have their character attacked in the public eye, They deserve nothing but contempt.

    Ah, that's it. The judge has been bought off. There's no point in a having a trial, the result is forgone.

    Why does this stuff get modded as insightful on slashdot? Have we all become a bunch of in-grained idiots cheering for our favourites, without paying even lip service to the facts? How about, rather than pre-judging everything, and accusing judges of being crooked, we wait a little while and examine the facts that are revealed? I know its a lot to ask, but aren't we supposed to be geeks? Aren't facts and logic what we deal with?

    There is a misconception here that this is a trail before the court of public opinion. This is not the case. This is a trial before the law. It doesn't matter what we believe is fair and just, frequently the law isn't to all parties, it matters what can be proven in law. Of course if you're backing Samsung, because Apple is evil, none of this matters. They are guilty and should just cease trading and give all of their IP to Google for the benefit of mankind.

    Call me old fashioned but I'd like to hear the evidence before making a judgement.

  • by h4rr4r (612664) on Wednesday August 01, 2012 @10:22AM (#40842057)

    I would like to hear how apple can show an pre-iPhone device and not let Samsung present the fact that this is a pre-iPhone device.

    That seems like Samsung must allow a lie to go unchallenged.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 01, 2012 @10:25AM (#40842125)

    >Call me old fashioned but I'd like to hear the evidence before making a judgement.

    Call me old fashioned but I'd like the jury to hear all of the evidence before they make a judgement.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 01, 2012 @10:27AM (#40842141)

    Have we all become a bunch of in-grained idiots cheering for our favourites, without paying even lip service to the facts?

    Seriously? Seriously? Slashdot has become a cesspool of wanna-be intellectuals who almost all horribly suffer from penis envy and group-think. Yes, seriously. Hell, the vast, vast, vast majority of comments which are moderated up these days are ignorant, wrong, half correct, or emotionally charged drivel. And if you start reading at 0 and -1, you'll find many a factually accurate post which has been censored because its contrary to the all too often wrong group-think mentality around here.

    Sorry, but slashdot is dead. Its now a proverbial cesspool of wanna-bes.

  • by atriusofbricia (686672) on Wednesday August 01, 2012 @10:53AM (#40842461) Journal

    But, the iPhone design images are from 2005, a year before the Samsung sketches. Samsung's design could have been created independently, but it could have also been based on information leaked by hardware suppliers in Asia. Who knows.

    So in the face of the above you seem to be claiming that Samsung was so crap scared of the 'awesome innovation' of the unreleased iPhone that they used their spy network to get the details so they can design one that was similar?

    Either that or design convergence around common technology was at work. So, either spy network or "design a phone with a massive touch screen" leads to similar designs. I prefer spy network. It leads to Bond women or something.

  • by DJRumpy (1345787) on Wednesday August 01, 2012 @10:57AM (#40842517)

    Because Apple already submitted images into evidence dating back to 2003 for the iPad and from 2005 for the iPhone. The images linked above are from 2006, making them irrelevant 'noise'. Unless Samsung can submit certified designs pre-dating those from Apple, then they are just attempting to push meaningless evidence at the jury in hopes that it will confuse, which is probably why the judge didn't allow these images.

    If someone here can show a link to some sort of evidence where Samsung has submitted direct evidence of such, I have yet to see it, and so does the judge given the evidence presented so far.

    Everyone seems to forget that Samsung was machining these phones for Apple, so of course they knew exactly what they looked like and operated long before they hit the public. The iPhone was released in June 2007 with early prototypes created in 2005. They would have engaged Samsung long before 2007 to begin the process of contracting with them to produce these phones from their factory.

    The evidence presented was disallowed because it added nothing of value. It doesn't pre-date the evidence submitted by Apple and is therefore irrelevant.

  • by h4rr4r (612664) on Wednesday August 01, 2012 @11:01AM (#40842569)

    The iPhone had not yet been released in 2006, it came out in 2007. Did Apple tell Samsung to avoid designing a similar phone before Apple announced it?

    Simultaneous independent development suggest that this design should fail the obviousness test for patentability.

    Did Samsung actually do any machining? I thought they only supplied parts.

  • by PortHaven (242123) on Wednesday August 01, 2012 @11:08AM (#40842669) Homepage

    None of this is invention...this is all about style. And style should NOT be patentable. Especially when it is evolutionary and tied to use design. By which I mean the use of a tool determines it's design.

    A shovel, regardless of design will likely have a handle, and a broad flat shape attached to the end. Whether it is slightly tapered to a spade, extra wide for snow, or narrow and elongated for trench digging are merely evolutions of an inherent use design.

  • by Dynedain (141758) <slashdot2 AT anthonymclin DOT com> on Wednesday August 01, 2012 @11:17AM (#40842799) Homepage

    Wrong. Judges should not have to fear for their jobs just because they make an unpopular decision. Judges are expected to be neutral arbiters in a court of law, not the court of public opinion.

  • by thefinite (563510) on Wednesday August 01, 2012 @11:25AM (#40842903)
    In civil trials, you have a pre-trial period called discovery. In big, complex trials like these, discovery lasts for many months. During the discovery process, each side is entitled to ask for, and required to provide, evidence from the other side. In addition to this, each side is required to provide to the opposing counsel all of the evidence they might bring up at trial. This is intended to allow both sides plenty of time to investigate the opposing evidence and prepare their responses.

    Samsung's attorneys failed to produce the evidence about the design of the F700 during the discovery period. This is in spite of it being around for several years before the lawsuit was even filed by Apple. By holding it back until just before the trial, Apple's counsel didn't get the time to investigate the evidence and prepare their responses. Because we have an adversarial legal system, one in which two parties fighting over the truth before an independent jury, it's important that the rules guarantee both parties a fair fight.

    Judge Koh decided that holding back that evidence until after discovery broke the rules required for a fair fight, especially considering that 1) Samsung had the evidence available for years, and 2) if the evidence is actually the smoking gun that they claim, it should have been presented during discovery to give Apple the right to examine it and prepare a response. I think this was a reasonable decision by the judge. To be fair, consider how you would have reacted if the roles had been reversed and Apple had tried to introduce such important evidence so late.

    All that said, and knowing how some lawyers can be, I suspect the evidence is being overblown by the Samsung attorney because he wants a path to appeal. Improperly denied evidence could give rise to an entire retrial. But I suspect:
    1. someone on Samsung's legal team screwed up and didn't include the evidence in discovery
    2. the Samsung attorneys realized the screw up and are now trying to make a silk purse from a sow's ear
    3. the evidence is actually quite weak (See this excellent takedown [theverge.com] of how the F700 is not much like the iPhone at all.)
    4. by releasing the evidence in a press release, the attorney is trying to manipulate the judge, not get a fair outcome.

    Combined with the evidence destruction [bloomberg.com] by Samsung, they've really been screwing this one up.

  • by Surt (22457) on Wednesday August 01, 2012 @11:33AM (#40842961) Homepage Journal

    I'm pretty sure to anyone who has a legal background the strategy is pure grounds-for-appeal bait at this point. They are forcing the judge to issue ruling after ruling revealing her bias.

  • by Deorus (811828) on Wednesday August 01, 2012 @11:37AM (#40843021)

    Call me old fashioned but I'd like the jury to hear all of the evidence before they make a judgement.

    Which they are going to. Those designs were suppressed because they are not evidence.

  • by s73v3r (963317) <{moc.liamg} {ta} {r3v37s}> on Wednesday August 01, 2012 @01:16PM (#40844639)

    Yes, clearly because she's not ruled the way YOU want, she must be dirty and bought off.

  • by gnasher719 (869701) on Wednesday August 01, 2012 @01:40PM (#40845083)

    Even more unsure how this evidence can be dismissed by a judge. It's important.

    If it is important, then please explain why Samsung produced it after the deadline. There are three logical explanations: 1. This evidence was good evidence, but Samsung's lawyers are morons who didn't submit that evidence until it was too late. 2. This was evidence that Apple could have refuted if they did a careful search, so Samsung's lawyers tried to get the evidence in as late as possible so that Apple wouldn't have time to find out what's wrong with it. 3. This is evidence that Samsung always knew was rubbish, so they intentionally submitted it after the deadline, hoping that people would think that Samsung is treated unfairly when it is refused, and again not giving Apple a chance to refute it.

  • by s73v3r (963317) <{moc.liamg} {ta} {r3v37s}> on Wednesday August 01, 2012 @01:43PM (#40845129)

    Even more unsure how this evidence can be dismissed by a judge. It's important.

    Why? It doesn't actually change anything or mean anything.

    Seems to me like we need a better judge.

    By that you mean, "One who will be biased in favor of what I want"?

No amount of careful planning will ever replace dumb luck.

Working...