back to article Apple demands Samsung flogged for 'unethical' court doc leak

Apple has said it will file an emergency motion of censure against Samsung after its South Korean rival released information to the press that had been barred in court. "This deliberate attempt to influence the trial with inadmissible evidence is both improper and unethical," said William Lee, Apple's legal counsel. "Accordingly …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

Holmes

Wtf

As far as I can tell, Apple could have argued that the F700 was actually an Apple design stolen from Steve Jobs's sock drawer, and Samsung would be barred from arguing otherwise...

47
2

Re: Wtf

Pretty much.

Can't imagine why Samsung felt the need to take the back door on this one. Btw, Judge Koh, since you already said this isn't evidence and the jury is already avoiding all coverage of the trial (you did instruct them to do that, right?), it's too late for you to have an opinion on who Samsung talk to about it. Two-edged sword, etc.

13
1

Re: Wtf

educate yourself as to when the and how and why the F700 came about... after the iPhone, so yes it was a copy of the iPhone....

from an ANDROID site no less....

http://androidcommunity.com/who-was-really-first-apple-vs-samsung-story-truly-debunked-20110420/

2
48

Re: Wtf

and by the way the falsified evidence, introduced late, and then barred for being untimely did not have anything to do with the introduction of the F700... it was about a sony design, that turned out to be really an Apple design.... duhhh...

why do you think it was barred... Apple wished it wasn't barred, so that they could make fun of Samsung trying to make out that Apple CAD drawings were Sony's instead....

did you really think Samsung would sit on proof for two years when they were first sued, only to introduce it at the last second? the reason is because Samsung faked a story line that could not be backed up, and a time line that lived in only their imaginations....

2
49

Re: Wtf

I love the guys with the "real knowledge" while the rest of us schmucks have to go by silly published facts.

First off, every single news article, including here on El Reg, specifically said the slides released were about the F700's design process (along with several other phones from both Samsung and others). If you don't believe everyone, just check out the first page of Google results for 'samsung leaked slides' and you'll see them for yourself. Here's one: http://1.androidauthority.com/wp-content/gallery/samsung-leaked-slides/87782.jpg

If you have evidence that a) the F700 was designed by Sony (which is the most sense I could make of that second rant) and b) the slides above are fradulent in some way then you should probably be contacting both Apple and Sony, not to mention Judge Koh, because none of them seem to be clued in to this. I bet Sony in particular would probably be pretty happy to learn they forgot Samsung owes them a couple million on the low end.

Second of all, since you've clearly never worked in any sort of serious profession where R&D is a thing, let me help you out on understanding timelines. Cellular phones aren't designed in a weekend. The F700 may have been released shortly after the iPhone, this has nothing to do with when it was designed. Just getting the FCC SAR testing for a new cellular body and antenna done takes months. The conceptual design for this phone would have been started back when Steve Jobs was swearing up and down to Walt Mossberg in WSJ that Apple would never enter the cell phone market.

51
0
Holmes

Re: Wtf

The F700 was designed and registered in Korea before the iPhone was released. Apple initially included the F700 in copying allegations against Samsung, but later withdrew the allegations. See http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1257891/Samsung_unredacted_trial_brief.pdf page 4.

20
0
Anonymous Coward

You don't

You don't win arguments in court by upsetting the judge!

Not in a US court anyway.

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Here we go again

Judge criticises Samsung, Fandroids read headlines begin tantrum, bury heads in soil screaming 'it's not right, it's not fair,' resulting in numerous upvotes.

Judge criticises Apple, Fanbois read whole article delve into the background give responsible considered arguments, resulting in numerous downvotes.

So who are the children and who are the adults?

8
40

Re: Here we go again

"So who are the children and who are the adults?"

All of us here and certainly not you, respectively.

13
5
Anonymous Coward

Re: Wtf

And of course this site can be trusted rather than the court papers. It would be a waste of time for Samsung to even claim this if that site is correct.

3
1
Silver badge
FAIL

"All of us here and certainly not you, respectively."

So we're all children? I beg to differ.

0
1
Silver badge

Enough already!

- Future solution:

All R&D houses must submit a weekly overview of their week's work in sealed hard-copy to a bonded warehouse. These sealed envelopes are only retrieved in case of patent / design copyright disputes. It would settle the 'we thought of it first' arguments, thou alas not the subjective aspects of 'your X looks too much like our Y' or the meaning of 'non-obvious'.

Its got to be cheaper than paying these lawyers.

1
1

Re: You don't

You shouldn't loose them either. The judge should be impartial, even in a US court.

If there is nothing illegal about publishing documents that are not part of the court case then I don't see the problem. The jury should not be reading anything that might be related to the trial and must disregard and in-submersible or unsubmitted evidence they might pick up in the real world. It might cause bad PR for the US legal system and for Apple but the press is partly there to make stupid actions look bad so the laws get updated. Checks, balances and all that jazz.

4
1

Re: Enough already!

I was always trained to keep a log book with dates and continuous updates because it could be used as a basis for patents. I would then have to sear that the dates I had written corresponded to the items I had detailed. It is not infallible and it would be forgeable but getting a handful of engineers or scientist to record informal documents are well as formal ones builds a case that the dates are real.

2
0
Silver badge

Re: Here we go again

Hey, AC: Let's try an alternative. Judge criticises Samsung, after having already signed off on bans prior to any jury decision.

Perhaps Samsung has already determined that this is a screwed up parody of justice and there's slim chance they'll actually win with everything seemingly falling neatly in Apple's lap before a jury decision has even been reached.

4
1
Silver badge

Re: Here we go again

The only Apple product I've ever purchased was a refurbed iPod, which hardly ever gets used. I'm a redneck 'Merkin who likes to see our products dominating world markets. Even I can see how biased the judge is being in this case.

4
1
Happy

Re: Here we go again

"Fanroids" :>

1
0

Re: Here we go again

Lol...you just proved his point that comprehension levels of children with unconsidered reactionary answers cannot be compared with adult responses that pose intelligent questions allied to real world facts.

eg. The judge is bent/paid by Apple/doesn't know the law etc etc

Only in America.

1
1
Silver badge
Meh

Re: Here we go again @ AC 06.40

I think you have proved your theory down to the last full stop.

0
0
Bronze badge

Re: You don't

Quite right. Freedom of speech in Kor... oh wait...

Where?

0
0
FAIL

Re: Here we go again

Yeah Apple.... They completely lost any credibility with me a LONG time ago.

An external Apple USB HDD came in at about $750 from the Apple store, while 2 blocks away, an external USB HDD case went for $35 and an identical HDD went for $130....

There is a good video on Youtube of Steve Jobs saying how he steals other peoples stuff.

steve jobs - stealing ideas.mpeg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXx1wZc99gM

And someone left a comment there too:

Where is he buried? I'd like to dance on his grave.

"We invented the tablet" - No, you didn't, I had a Toshiba tablet int he late 90s back when you we're making shitty computers with missing mouse buttons. You stole it.

"We invented the smartphone" - Nope, that was Palm at the turn of the millennium, 4 years before the iPhone. You stole it.

"We invented the GUI..." - Actually no that was Xerox. You stole it.

"The galaxy tab looks like an iPad" - Cry me a fucking river.

Innovator my arse.

ilovepinkfloydyay 2 weeks ago

So I think this may mark the downfall of Apple somehow. They get too big for their boots and Corporation Apple kicks world in head and World kicks apple back....

They seem to have gotten to the high point on the see-saw and it's all downhill from here.

3
0

Californication

It does not surprise me that Caliifornia courts would be looking out for Apples's bottom line. When we left Caliifornia with our kids from previous marriage thirty previous cases were decided on the basis on who was staying in California and not who was the better parent - hence keeping money flowing into the sate. Koth is a hack and might as well be on Apple's payroll. There is so much prior art against the Apple patents this should never have gone to trial.... one thing to note is that in California there is ground to sue the judge under judicial malpractice.

30
3
FAIL

Re: Californication

If i have read right what samsung released was already in public domain to start with so they did nothing wrong. Apple are the guilty party by making false claims about a phone that predates theirs and also the judge for allowing them to do so and blocking the proof that apple is full of it.

21
4

Re: it was a falsified release,

no, it was not in public domain because it was a made up storyline.... unless you believe lies should be released to the media... as "evidence"..... take note this link is to an Android site.... who were none to pleased with the lying going on.....

http://androidcommunity.com/who-was-really-first-apple-vs-samsung-story-truly-debunked-20110420/

http://daringfireball.net/2012/07/inspired

maybe actually reading about something that apparently you don't even want to know what was going on..., but just incase someone wants to improve their perspective on what really went down....

4
37

Re: it was a falsified release,

You do realize that thing you keep posting was something some fan put together and nothing to do with the slides that Samsung wanted to put into court, right?

21
0

Re: it was a falsified release,

I should add that linking an article a year and a half old while trying to claim it talks about a current event is a pretty surefire sign of less than honest intentions.

13
1
Silver badge

Talking about the design history of the F700 is current events?

What the like does is point out that the story that the F700 was released befor the iPhone is a myth.

Samsung MAY have a design patent for something that looked a bit like the F700 dated late 2006, but sure as heck they made some changes prior to actually releasing it, and that was long after the iPhone debut. The fact that it was a keyboard slider design seems to be convieniently ignored also.

1
11
Anonymous Coward

Re: it was a falsified release,

Posting the same article link over and over again does not make you or the article correct.

13
0
Stop

Re: Talking about the design history of the F700 is current events?

So by your logic, Samsung pulled out all the stops to redesign a phone to copy a product from a company that had absolutely ZERO experience in the mobile phone market and released a model that was highly controversial at the time for relying solely on a completely untested new OS based around a touchscreen interface that lacked the accuracy of a stylus input (common practice until then) all in a very expensive, minimalist body, that lacked many features found in similarly priced competitor phones. This product could just as well have been another flop like the newton before it, so why should Samsung or anyone else spend vast amounts of money trying to copy it?

6
0
Pirate

Re: Talking about the design history of the F700 is current events?

Absolutely right. It's called covering all the bases. And Samsung is about to be found out for falsifying a paper trail.

0
2
FAIL

Re: it was a falsified release,

@honkj, just because you repeat something over and over again doesn't make it fact mate.

I suggest you read the article you link to - with the incredibly dubious phrase "Truly debunked" in the title - which does nothing to convince me of either argument to be honest.

All it achieves is to point out that the first time the Samsung device was seen in the wild was 1month after the iphone was first demonstrated. This does not prove that either manufacturer was first. The article even ends up pretty much saying (and I paraphrase) "We don't really know, what do you, the reader, think..."

If you're going to link to something as "The Answer" - make sure it actually is...

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Judge Koh is harming Calfornia - time for her to be replaced

I have a Compaq IPAQ with the features they claim as Apple's. I still run TomTom on it occasionally. Is sticking a phone into it such a big deal? Not IMO... but I wasn't asked...

7
4
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: Judge Koh is harming Calfornia - time for her to be replaced

No, you'd need to be a complete idiot to mistake an iPaq for am iPhone (and yes, I have owned both. The iPaq is still about somewhere). The two are completely unlike each other and Windows mobile lacks the UI features that Apple are asserting their patents on also.

3
10
Silver badge
FAIL

Wow, the fandroids are out in force today

Perhaps they could explain how an all silver device with many sharp edges, a recessed resistive touch screen and ornamental features all over the place could be mistaken for an iPhone. Go look it up on Wikipedia and see what it looks like. It has precisely non of the features that Apple are suing over.

1
6
Go

Re: Judge Koh is harming Calfornia - time for her to be replaced

Actually I think there were versions out that also had inbuilt phone modules as well. These are the true grandfathers of the smartphone.

2
0
Silver badge
Stop

Re: Judge Koh is harming Calfornia - time for her to be replaced

Yes, there were versions with 3G IIRC, but Apple isn't suing Samsung for putting 3G data in their phones.

What they ARE suing them for is copying the iPhone case design (which the iPaq looks nothing like) and UI features like pinch to zoom (not possible on a single point resistive screen) and overscroll bounce back (you couldn't scroll past limits on Windows Mobile).

0
6

Re: Judge Koh is harming Calfornia - time for her to be replaced

The F700 says "Samsung" on it. How do you confuse that? Oh, are they standing up for blind people who got "duped" into buying a Samsung phone?

1
1
Silver badge
Stop

Re: Judge Koh is harming Calfornia - time for her to be replaced

And the F700 is related to how the iPaq looks just how?

Putting your own logo on someone else's design doesn't render your device free from IP infringement claims. You will also find people who don't know any better being told by salesmen (who should) "oh, it's the same thing but cheaper" which is where the problem lies.

0
2
Anonymous Coward

really.... long before... yet couldn't introduce it till after the iPhone?

the F700 was introduced AFTER the iPhone in march 2007 and looked like it was cobled together even then, it had a patent in Dec 2006, unless you believe the iPhone was designed, built prototyped and manufactured in 9 days in Jan 2007, then it didn't come before the iPhone, and actually was ripping off the iPhone, because samsung had access to Apple's design, to build the main CPU for Apple.....

also the iphone was designed in 2005 and earlier, along with the iPad in 2002-2004....

2
36

Re: really.... long before... yet couldn't introduce it till after the iPhone?

and by the way, apple is producing actual proof in the form of prototypes, documenting that the iPhone was designed in 2005 and earlier, and along with the iPad and iPhone concepts in 2002-2004....

do a google search of the documents Apple is presenting from the evidence stream, just as the trial started...

3
35
FAIL

Re: really.... long before... yet couldn't introduce it till after the iPhone?

Just want to point something out here honkj...

If your going to spam a comment thread with your version of events, which in this case are...well...frankly they scare me about your sanity. Anyway if your going to spam the thread and you post one as anonymous, you should probably not reply to your own post without hiding yourself behind the mask again. Just saying.

24
0

Re: really.... long before... yet couldn't introduce it till after the iPhone?

"the iphone was designed in 2005 and earlier, along with the iPad in 2002-2004...."

But it was designed in secret - Samsung did not have access to that design.

Their argument is that they developed a rounded corners* phone without copying Apple.

*asterisk because I think this is still the stupidest legal argument I've heard. Good thing no one designed a triangular phone, the descendants of Pythagoras and Isosoles could sue them!

14
0
Vic
Silver badge

Re: really.... long before... yet couldn't introduce it till after the iPhone?

> frankly they scare me about your sanity.

There's nothing wrong with his sanity.

Look at his posting history. There's something of a ... theme going on.

Vic.

5
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: really.... long before... yet couldn't introduce it till after the iPhone?

> Look at his posting history. There's something of a ... theme going on.

You mean 13 posts. Every single one rabidly defending apple. Every single one with more down votes than up votes.

I think he needs to work on his presentation skills. They seem to be lacking.

7
0

Re: really.... long before... yet couldn't introduce it till after the iPhone?

Honkj is also on Dailytech saying exactly the same thing in the same story...

6
0
Anonymous Coward

Wow Apple are desperate aren't they

Paying shills like honkj to fill forums full of lies like this in the hope that if enough are put about they will get their own way. It's the only reason I can think of why him and others are spamming every forum they can find with the same already discredited bullshit

8
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: Wow Apple are desperate aren't they

Yes, but it is saving me some time. Now I can just downvote any post where I see the name and not have to bother reading the drivel.

3
0

Re: really.... long before... yet couldn't introduce it till after the iPhone?

And IBM invented the tablet computer form factor back in the sixties.

0
0
Flame

Par for the course...

She's pretty much agreed with everything her masters Apple have asked so far

14
5

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.

Forums