No, Miss Koh, you are not.
Groundhog Day was a fun and enjoyable experience.
Samsung tried its very hardest to argue for a retrial in a hearing with Apple yesterday, as the fruity firm pushed for additional damages on top of the $1bn it already won. The hearing was ostensibly to discuss permanent bans on sales of Samsung products that a jury decided infringed Apple patents, but the South Korean firm's …
Groundhog Day was a fun and enjoyable experience.
Only for those on the outside, looking in. I think Bill Murray's character would simply nod knowingly and sympathetically to the judge.
Less like "Groundhog Day" more like "Vantage Point "
Both will end up as wasting the time of the general public.
So basically "12:01 PM" - i.e just really sad.
"Both will end up as wasting the time of the general public."
The public are wasting the courts time by granting millions of dubious patents. "The People" are the villains in this case.
You should phone the PO and tell them to stop.
Even just looking at the jury foreman produces enough material to get it dismissed without referring to the issue of his failing to declare a previous interest.
Just look at some of his press statements:
The highlight of my career
Prior art doesn't count as it doesn't run on the same hardware
I told them what to say as they didn't understand the issues
and so on, how Samsungs lawyers haven't managed to get it declared a mistrial yet I don't know.
"how Samsungs lawyers haven't managed to get it declared a mistrial yet I don't know."
Apple are using the best court they could buy, in their own backyard, natch.
Get the feeling the Judge is also part of the problem. Fair enough warn them that negotiating is better than going to trial, but as its painfully obvious the two sides will never agree, just get on with it. Boot her out, get another person in and get on with round 2.
I want my popcorn icon
I agree, it almost seems that she doesn't want to make any decisions. Could it be because the onlyrational one is going to cost a US company a whole lot of wonga?
I was thinking the same thing and also wondering if it would play out the same way if it were in the UK.
I can't help but feel that Judge Koh is a bit self serving, she seems to me to be complaining about what is in effect due process and having to do what she's employed to do.
The way that it's all played out in the courts and the media in the US makes the whole thing a bit of a freak show which is gathering attention seeking legal people, and probably turning people who may once have been not interested in attention around, once there's a little bit of hype people start to believe their own press and seem to crave more of the same and adjust their behaviour to accumulate attention.
I agree that Judge Koh seems to be complaining about having to do her job, but then I doubt she ever expected her job to involve what amounts to being a kindergarten teacher.
In her place, I would refer them both to the reply given in the case of Arkell v. Pressdram.
"I was thinking the same thing and also wondering if it would play out the same way if it were in the UK."
From the very start she brought a rather strange touch to the proceedings.
There was never to be a winner so it really needed a more clinical strategy.
It should never have had a jury either.
Sure, she can seem to be complaining about due process, but she is urging Apple to settle with Samsung "saying it would be good for customers and the industry". Which it will be because they can both get back to innovating, something Apple actually seems to NOT to be doing, while it tries to keep Samsung from doing business. Samsung crows that they're all for that, so it seems to be Apple digging in their heels so that they can extract their "pound of flesh" to teach the world a lesson.
"Stealing is wronng," whined Tim Cook, who's company has since been found guilty of usurping IP of a Swiss photographer and the Swiss railways, as well as that of VirtnetX...
Surely a secret agreement behind closed doors between these two is the last thing the world wants or needs.
The issues are important and should be decided in law. Yes I know you are going to whine about money going to lawyers, but nevertheless there should be a clear and legal decision, not one based on not paying lawyers.
Hmmm they paid a license and all parties were happy , whereas samsung, was judged to be part of a price fixing cartel
I know which one has done the more damage!
Fucking hell I am sick to death of AAPL and their bullshit.
Can't wait til they go tits up.
I wonder what court cases are being delayed because of this. I appreciate this is corporate court or some-such, but surely that judge's abilities are better used elsewhere.
Flip a coin, loser doesn't make phones anymore?
So long as it's double sided with the samsung logo on both sides I'm all up for that.
Which would really help the market wouldn't it? reduce competition and choice, great move.
Wow, phone fangirlz & boyz are super serious.
Remember choosing a phone is not just a relatively cheap commitment you can dispose of after a few months it's for life.
God help you when you have to get a mortgage.
When I bought a house, I was thankfully able to have a full choice of houses, even though most of them followed this rectangular-corner pattern, and all followed this same basic design.
"So long as it's double sided with the samsung logo on both sides I'm all up for that."
So bitter. But you know, you don't need a time machine to have a phone that Apple will have in three years. It's already being made by Samsung. So you can just get it and be happy.
Yeh but I bet none of them had rectangular windows with rounded corners.
Does the judge have any power to tell the squabbling parties that the case is over and they should go forth and multiply? Apple vs Samsung is getting to be like a cross between the cases of Tweedledum and Tweedledee, and Jarndyce vs Jarndyce. It's something of an open secret that the main purpose of patent litigation like this is to slow the competition down with a protracted and very expensive process rather than the actual outcome.
Honestly the jury shouldn't have been in charge of how much should be awarded for damages. They should have decided which patents were infringed upon, and which phones infringed with the damages calculated afterwards based on those figures, a % of earnings per patent infringed with a maximum of 20% (or something) That way we'd know at least that the damages were fair.
... wouldn't that be composed of representatives of other tech / phone companies rather than individuals? I really cannot see why a jury of laypeople is necessary, or even desirable in cases like this.
I've always wondered about that phrase.... who decides who your peers are? has anyone ever actually complained because the jury are not their peers??
At a guess it's for reasons such as:
As a phone company, I prefer Samsung as they ship Android as their OS which as an operator, I can then customise with all of my own junk, helping to lock customers into my network. Apple on the other hand supply a closed OS that is the same on every other network.
Although I do agree that there needs to be some kind of tech knowledge involved to avoid the whole jury listening to one man with motives. Perhaps a jury of retired tech's from small unknown companies who've probably gone belly up by now.
"She urged the companies again to settle, saying it would be good for customers and the industry if they did"
Probably better for customers and the industry if the case could be dismissed, with no damages granted, so these stupid patent lawsuits can stop.
Probably better if she told them both that neither of them could sell any phones until the case was settled.
Spot on. They'd sort it out in about no time flat, then...
"She urged the companies again to settle, saying it would be good for customers and the industry if they did."
It would be good for customers and the industry to throw this out of court (as done in the UK and elsewhere).
If APPL can get a billion for double clicks and rounded rectangles, they're not going to accept a small amount as a settlement. And, never mind not being fair to Samsung, if they were to settle for a huge amount (or any non-trivial amount), this would neither be good for customers (higher prices, less choice) or the industry (they'd be going after everyone else, too).
It's hardly a billion just for that - they ripped off the whole thing - you look at them side by side and even their own legal team could not tell them apart - not THAT is embarrassing.
"If APPL can get a billion for double clicks and rounded rectangles"
Since they didn't you demonstrate yet again what a trolling idiot moron you are.
Get the Apple and Samsung top brass together. Add their respective legal teams.
Put them all in a large sack.
Charge the public USA$5 to beat the sack with a stick until they are exhausted.
You'll always hit the guilty party, the obese USA-ians will get some much needed exercise and you'll raise some money to boot (donate that to charity).
"Some" money... ?
With the amount *that* particular idea would bring in you would be able to clear the deficit of a small state... ;)
Only morons resort to physical violence. I always thought better of The Register's readership.
Only morons hide behind an anon mask while insulting others.
Do get out more. There's a good fellow.
> Only morons resort to physical violence. I always thought better of The Register's readership.
OK, then ...
- Put them all in a large sack.
- Build a robot with that is able to beat the sack with the stick.
- Give the robot a vaguely sexist acronym and allow it to beat the sack until it is exhausted.
Needs moar Playmobil
> Give the robot a vaguely sexist acronym
This, Sir, is demeaning to robots. I demand satisfaction!
"This, Sir, is demeaning to robots. I demand satisfaction!"
There's a robot for that...
+1 Man . . . Would enjoy that and I could use the exercise being a geek that sit on his arse too much . . . ;))
There's a robot for every robot, or so they say.
That's up there with
"War! What is is good for?"
Well, ridding Europe of a genocidal megalomaniac about 70 years ago for starters.
Samsung should just pay up as per the original verdict, get it over and done with and do their own thing from here on...