or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Samsung takes excluded evidence to the media, gets reprimanded
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Samsung takes excluded evidence to the media, gets reprimanded

post #1 of 117
Thread Starter 
Samsung was dressed down in court on Tuesday after the company leaked evidence excluded from the proceedings to media outlets and issued an out-of-court statement saying the exhibits "would have established beyond doubt that Samsung did not copy the iPhone design."

The comment refers to the exclusion of a deposition taken from former Apple designer Shin Nishibori which outlined a conversation he had with the company's Senior Vice President of Industrial Design Jonathan Ive over what an iPhone would look like if it were made by Sony, reports PC Magazine.

"The Judge?s exclusion of evidence on independent creation meant that even though Apple was allowed to inaccurately argue to the jury that the F700 was an iPhone copy, Samsung was not allowed to tell the jury the full story and show the pre-iPhone design for that and other phones that were in development at Samsung in 2006, before the iPhone," Samsung said in a statement. "The excluded evidence would have established beyond doubt that Samsung did not copy the iPhone design. Fundamental fairness requires that the jury decide the case based on all the evidence."

In a follow-up report from CNet, presiding Judge Lucy Koh was made aware of the evidence leak by Apple attorneys and ordered Samsung to file a brief explaining who wrote the statement and who green-lit its dissemination. The judge was reportedly "audibly irritated."

Samsung Evidence Leak
Source: Samsung


AppleInsider first discovered Samsung's "Sony-styled" iPhone evidence when the company presented its trial brief last Friday, but the design and deposition were ultimately excluded from the trial.

From Nishibori's deposition in May:

First, Jonathan Ive talked to me. "Well, Shin, I have something to talk to you about." He said, "You can do this as an aside of your job and enjoy - I want you to enjoy doing this. But if Sony were to make a iPhone, what would it be like? Would you make it for me?"


Samsung is not allowed to bring up the prototype or associated arguments during the trial.

According to Financial Times reporter Tim Bradshaw, who tweeted the court proceedings on Tuesday, Samsung argued that Apple didn't invent the rectangular screen, a view most recently asserted by the company's Chief Product Officer Kevin Packingham.

While Apple argued the iPhone "changed phones forever" during its opening statement, the Galaxy maker noted Samsung parts account for some 26 percent of an iPhone and asked, "who's the real innovator?"
post #2 of 117

Finally!  This case has made it to trial.  Where’s my popcorn?

post #3 of 117
How long can we expect this trial to last?

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #4 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

From Nishibori's deposition in May:

First, Jonathan Ive talked to me. "Well, Shin, I have something to talk to you about." He said, "You can do this as an aside of your job and enjoy - I want you to enjoy doing this. But if Sony were to make a iPhone, what would it be like? Would you make it for me?"


Samsung is not allowed to bring up the prototype or associated arguments during the trial.

And rightfully so.

Samsung is accused of copying Apple's design and violating Apple's patents. The issue of where Apple got the idea is totally irrelevant. Either Samsung is guilty or they're not - regardless of the source of Apple's inspiration.


And what's with these guys? One court tells them to stop destroying evidence before a case - yet they do it anyway in the Apple case.

Now, a judge tells them not to release information and they do it anyway.

Do they really think they're above the law?
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #5 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

And rightfully so.
Samsung is accused of copying Apple's design and violating Apple's patents. The issue of where Apple got the idea is totally irrelevant. Either Samsung is guilty or they're not - regardless of the source of Apple's inspiration.

No one is begrudging Samsung for saying "How can we out Apple Apple?" So far I've seen nothing that indicates that Apple stole Sony's IP to create the iPhone.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #6 of 117
Saying IF Sony made an iPhone, what would it look like is saying if Sony made something which they in fact had never made. Therefore, there's no copying a non-existent product.
Samsung is ridiculous, destroying documents and leaking court info. Are they trying to lose? How unethical. Obviously something to hide.
post #7 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Do they really think they're above the law?

Does Apple?

Because they certainly behave like it by twisting and manipulating the rules to the very fringes of legality at times.

Either way... Hopefully this will put and end to all of this seemingly anti-competitive nonsense.
"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
post #8 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

And rightfully so.
Samsung is accused of copying Apple's design and violating Apple's patents. The issue of where Apple got the idea is totally irrelevant. Either Samsung is guilty or they're not - regardless of the source of Apple's inspiration.
And what's with these guys? One court tells them to stop destroying evidence before a case - yet they do it anyway in the Apple case.
Now, a judge tells them not to release information and they do it anyway.
Do they really think they're above the law?

Truly an unbelievably arrogant company. Can't believe they think they can get away with things like this in the US.

/shakes head
post #9 of 117
Exactly. Starting to look like Samsung has no grasp of words.
post #10 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

No one is begrudging Samsung for saying "How can we out Apple Apple?" So far I've seen nothing that indicates that Apple stole Sony's IP to create the iPhone.

Out Apple Apple?

What does that even mean?
post #11 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post

Does Apple?
Because they certainly behave like it by twisting and manipulating the rules to the very fringes of legality at times.
Either way... Hopefully this will put and end to all of this seemingly anti-competitive nonsense.

The only thing that I hope it puts an end to is posts like these from you and your type.

But given how recalcitrant you are, I am not holding my breath.
post #12 of 117

This is clearly a case of Contempt of Court. You can go to prison for that - indefinitely. Someone should too, Samsung have been playing this case (and others) in the media to poison the public against Apple and for Samsung. I hope the Judge smacks them down - hard.

post #13 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post

Does Apple?
Because they certainly behave like it by twisting and manipulating the rules to the very fringes of legality at times.
Either way... Hopefully this will put and end to all of this seemingly anti-competitive nonsense.

Why don't you explain what Apple has done that's the equivalent of violating a direct order from a judge - not once, but twice?
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #14 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Out Apple Apple?
What does that even mean?

To out do Apple at their own game.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #15 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

While Apple argued the iPhone "changed phones forever" during its opening statement, the Galaxy maker noted Samsung parts account for some 26 percent of an iPhone and asked, "who's the real innovator?"

Um, still Apple. You had these parts and still had to copy. That is like a steel mill saying "Steel makes up 26% of {insert car company here}, who is the real innovator?"
post #16 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by GadgetCanada View Post

the Galaxy maker noted Samsung parts account for some 26 percent of an iPhone and asked, "who's the real innovator?"


What about the people who made the screws, plastic, metal and glass? That has to account for over 50% of the phone. Technically, Apple doesn't even own the iPhone.
And for Samsung, what about all the miners who dug up all that rare earth elements that makes up Samsung's electronics, "who's the real innovator?". It's the miners! The Chinese miners are the real innovators for every electronic device ever created.

In all seriousness, who writes this stuff for Samsung?

That's the law game. To quote the movie Training Day, "it's not what you know it's what you can prove."

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #17 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

To out do Apple at their own game.

I guess I still have no idea what that means: what 'game' is Apple playing that Samsung is trying to emulate?

PS: Not at all trying to be obtuse or clever.
post #18 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by starbird73 View Post

Um, still Apple. You had these parts and still had to copy. That is like a steel mill saying "Steel makes up 26% of {insert car company here}, who is the real innovator?"

Not quite. Its more like mazda throwing a Ford engine, transmission and Ecu into a car and calling it theirs. Raw material vs Engineered Microcontrollers, circuits. Big difference.
post #19 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbansprawl View Post

Saying IF Sony made an iPhone, what would it look like is saying if Sony made something which they in fact had never made. Therefore, there's no copying a non-existent product.
 

 

Well, it's even worse than that.  By that point in the middle of the last decade, Apple already had iPhone designs which looked a lot like what would eventually become the iPhone 4 - the rounded corners, flat front and back, bezel size, home button, side switches, the works.  It appears one of their designers then decided to conduct a thought-experiment, "What would this design look like in Sony drag (circa 1983)."  So they added a few old skool Sony-styled buttons and switches to it, and that little Sony-esque knob.

 

None of which I might add ever made it into either the original iPhone, the iPhone 3G or the iPhone 4.

 

So it's hard to see what if anything this has to do with Samdung's fairly obvious copies of the original iPhone's design.  Apple's old iPhone prototype done up in Sony drag is completely irrelevant to the case.  Sammy copied the first released version of the iPhone, which is completely different from those earlier iPhone 4-esque prototypes, and neither the original iPhone nor the iPhone 4 shared any of the unique design elements from the Sony-decorated prototype.

 

Now, the funny / tragic thing is, the Sony-blinged iPhone design not only looks better than any phone Sony has ever actually released, it looks more like a classic, well-designed Sony product than anything the entire company has produced in about two decades.  Which probably explains why Sony is circling the drain while Apple is one of the most valuable companies on earth...

post #20 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbansprawl View Post

Saying IF Sony made an iPhone, what would it look like is saying if Sony made something which they in fact had never made. Therefore, there's no copying a non-existent product.
Samsung is ridiculous, destroying documents and leaking court info. Are they trying to lose? How unethical. Obviously something to hide.

 

Indeed.  These kind of design exercises are common.  If Ishiburi worked on Ive's team it would be completely typical for him to assign such a project.  "Design this, but in the style of that" etc. 

 

This is excellent evidence to the effect that Samsung doesn't actually "design" things in the same way.  They take what they see in the market, try to copy the parts that seem to work the best and roll all those, (or as many as they can), into their product.  That isn't design.  It isn't a proper design process.  

post #21 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

I guess I still have no idea what that means: what 'game' is Apple playing that Samsung is trying to emulate?
PS: Not at all trying to be obtuse or clever.

It's just a turn of phrase to suggesting that one can learn to be better than their opponent by studying their philosophies and tactics.. but that's too verbose. So, to restate, no one is begrudging Samsung for learning from Apple's philosophies and tactics, then using them to out maneuver them in the market.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #22 of 117
Originally Posted by SwissMac2 View Post
This is clearly a case of Contempt of Court. You can go to prison for that - indefinitely. Someone should too, Samsung have been playing this case (and others) in the media to poison the public against Apple and for Samsung. I hope the Judge smacks them down - hard.

 

Samsung should be made to build a giant prison (at their expense) around their headquarters in South Korea. It will be staffed with Apple guards (again at Samsung's expense), the mess hall will only serve apple-based dishes, and the warden is Scott Forstall.

 

 

1000

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply
post #23 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

It's just a turn of phrase to suggesting that one can learn to be better than their opponent by studying their philosophies and tactics.. but that's too verbose. So, to restate, no one is begrudging Samsung for learning from Apple's philosophies and tactics, then using them to out maneuver them in the market.

Understood, but which Apple philosophies and tactics involve violating direct court orders?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GadgetCanada View Post

the Galaxy maker noted Samsung parts account for some 26 percent of an iPhone and asked, "who's the real innovator?"

What about the people who made the screws, plastic, metal and glass? That has to account for over 50% of the phone. Technically, Apple doesn't even own the iPhone.
And for Samsung, what about all the miners who dug up all that rare earth elements that makes up Samsung's electronics, "who's the real innovator?". It's the miners! The Chinese miners are the real innovators for every electronic device ever created.

In all seriousness, who writes this stuff for Samsung?

The difference, of course, is that Apple pays for the stuff it gets from Samsung (or will have to pay when they finally reach an agreement or get a court order for the FRAND license rates).

Samsung, OTOH, seems to think that they can copy without compensation.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #24 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by SwissMac2 View Post

This is clearly a case of Contempt of Court. You can go to prison for that - indefinitely. Someone should too, Samsung have been playing this case (and others) in the media to poison the public against Apple and for Samsung. I hope the Judge smacks them down - hard.

 

Putting anyone in jail would be kind of pointless really.  What would be worse for Samsung is if the judge advises the jury about what went on, and instructs them to consider this behaviour as part of their deliberations.  

 

The kind of things Samsung's lawyers are doing are so egregious and so blatantly stupid and self-serving that more and more I think that the problem here is cultural.  This is a case of two groups of people looking at the exact same facts and seeing them completely differently, not a case of some smart lawyer trying to get away with a tricky "tactic."

 

The comment about them making 26% of the iPhone just shows an absolutely astounding lack of understanding.  It makes no sense to think of these millionaire business dudes and high priced lawyers being so stupid or trying to get away with such ridiculous stuff.  It makes more sense to assume that they just don't "see it" because the cultural basis of the understanding is missing.  

post #25 of 117

A majority of the pictures of the phones have already been released to the media. Its in their trial briefs that was put out last week.

 

The only difference is these "leaks' look more like slides that would've been used to present.

 

Not sure on the deposition stuff, too lazy to read all 20+ pages to see if were also mentioned.

post #26 of 117
Quote:
Samsung was dressed down in court on Tuesday after the company leaked evidence excluded from the proceedings to media outlets and issued an out-of-court statement saying the exhibits "would have established beyond doubt that Samsung did not copy the iPhone design."
The comment refers to the exclusion of a deposition taken from former Apple designer Shin Nishibori which outlined a conversation he had with the company's Senior Vice President of Industrial Design Jonathan Ive over what an iPhone would look like if it were made by Sony, reports PC Magazine.
"The Judge's exclusion of evidence on independent creation meant that even though Apple was allowed to inaccurately argue to the jury that the F700 was an iPhone copy, Samsung was not allowed to tell the jury the full story and show the pre-iPhone design for that and other phones that were in development at Samsung in 2006, before the iPhone," Samsung said in a statement. "The excluded evidence would have established beyond doubt that Samsung did not copy the iPhone design. Fundamental fairness requires that the jury decide the case based on all the evidence."

 

I don't get how the quote from Shin Nishibori being excluded prevents Samsung from showing their internal designs that led to the F700 and other phones???  This quote from Shin does nothing (imho) to establish beyond doubt that Samsung didn't copy. Am I missing something or is there a disconnect there?

 

Quote:
While Apple argued the iPhone "changed phones forever" during its opening statement, the Galaxy maker noted Samsung parts account for some 26 percent of an iPhone and asked, "who's the real innovator?"

 

Car manufacturers use parts from many different companies other than their own, but if another auto manufacturer made a car that looked nearly identical to theirs, they would take them to court. I'm not sure if they're trying to argue that because they make a number of the internal components that they should be allowed to copy? Or that they're more innovative (which really has nothing to do with the case)? Or that design shouldn't be protected? Their response just doesn't seem on target at addressing the complaint.

post #27 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Understood, but which Apple philosophies and tactics involve violating direct court orders?

I'm not sure how that relates to my comment as it doesn't seem germane to the conversation. To restate — since it appears my comment was written too poorly — I am agreeing with your initial assessment and that we all know where Samsung got its inspiration from, and that's fine, but the problem comes from violating IP instead of using that inspiration to create your own IP.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #28 of 117

Samsung's utterly lame attempted sophistry here is truly pathetic.

 

even more pathetic, tho, are the various blogs and "journalists" who are picking this Samsung BS up as if it were for real. hello, Wired? talk about media whores ...

 

it will be very interesting to see how the Judge reacts. to maintain control of the proceedings she needs to slam Samsung hard. at least a $1 million sanction, plus mandatory formal retraction.

post #29 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


And rightfully so.
Samsung is accused of copying Apple's design and violating Apple's patents. The issue of where Apple got the idea is totally irrelevant. Either Samsung is guilty or they're not - regardless of the source of Apple's inspiration.
And what's with these guys? One court tells them to stop destroying evidence before a case - yet they do it anyway in the Apple case.
Now, a judge tells them not to release information and they do it anyway.
Do they really think they're above the law?

 

They obviously think they are above the law, otherwise they wouldn't have so blatantly copied the iPhone and iPad down to the charger, packaging and packaging design. Hopefully they get hammered, and then next onto Google... the dynamic evil duo!

post #30 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post


Does Apple?
Because they certainly behave like it by twisting and manipulating the rules to the very fringes of legality at times.
Either way... Hopefully this will put and end to all of this seemingly anti-competitive nonsense.

 

Bullshit! The only anti-competitive behavior comes from Samsung meticulously copying every single aspect of the iPhone and iPad instead of creating their own innovative solutions.

post #31 of 117
Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post

it will be very interesting to see how the Judge reacts. to maintain control of the proceedings she needs to slam Samsung hard. at least a $1 million sanction, plus mandatory formal retraction.

 

Ooh… legally force Samsung to advertise on their website, "we shouldn't have tried to go over the judge's head". lol.gif

 

Originally Posted by FreeRange View Post
Bullshit! The only anti-competitive behavior comes from Samsung meticulously copying every single aspect of the iPhone and iPad instead of creating their own innovative solutions.

 

Ooh, and here they come to tell you that not "every single aspect" was copied.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply
post #32 of 117

How can Samsung argue Apple copied Sony by internal commissioning an original design with Apples internal staff to create a phone concept that was like nothing Sony ever made?

post #33 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo42 View Post


Not quite. Its more like mazda throwing a Ford engine, transmission and Ecu into a car and calling it theirs. Raw material vs Engineered Microcontrollers, circuits. Big difference.

Nice try but you couldn't be more wrong - steel is a commodity, just like the parts that Apple gets from Samsung. These are basic commodity components that Apple could source from other companies just as well - they are not unique to Samsung. And its important to point out that even though Apple gets the primary CPU from Samsung, Samsung manufactures it custom for Apple based on Apple's own design and technology.

post #34 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo42 View Post

Not quite. Its more like mazda throwing a Ford engine, transmission and Ecu into a car and calling it theirs. Raw material vs Engineered Microcontrollers, circuits. Big difference.

Fair enough, and I get your point (even though Mazda is part of the Ford Motor Company, so the analogy doesn't fit exactly). But you are right, not a raw material.
post #35 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo42 View Post


Not quite. Its more like mazda throwing a Ford engine, transmission and Ecu into a car and calling it theirs. Raw material vs Engineered Microcontrollers, circuits. Big difference.


Sammy uses a lot of their own components and their phones still suck.

post #36 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

 

Putting anyone in jail would be kind of pointless really.  What would be worse for Samsung is if the judge advises the jury about what went on, and instructs them to consider this behaviour as part of their deliberations.  

 

The kind of things Samsung's lawyers are doing are so egregious and so blatantly stupid and self-serving that more and more I think that the problem here is cultural.  This is a case of two groups of people looking at the exact same facts and seeing them completely differently, not a case of some smart lawyer trying to get away with a tricky "tactic."

 

The comment about them making 26% of the iPhone just shows an absolutely astounding lack of understanding.  It makes no sense to think of these millionaire business dudes and high priced lawyers being so stupid or trying to get away with such ridiculous stuff.  It makes more sense to assume that they just don't "see it" because the cultural basis of the understanding is missing.  

I'm sure they are using overpriced american lawyers who think they are gods. Disbarment would be the appropriate punishment for them.

post #37 of 117

Whatever. Steve Jobs has said many times that he respected the workmanship and detail in Sony's products. Jony Ive has said that he respects Braun. So Apple asked one of their designers to design a phone with the attention to detail that would be on par with something Sony might do. All he was saying is set the bar really high and see what you come up with. It's not like he said see what Sony is doing and copy it.

 

There is nothing wrong with appreciating another company's products. There is nothing wrong with taking inspiration from another company's products. There is a line where you cross from inspiration to out and out copying. It's not like Samsung borrowed a few ideas from the iPhone and put them into some of their phones. They took A LOT from the iPhone and put it into a single phone to create an iClone.

 

Some of Samsung's newer handsets look somewhat different, but the one in question was damn near identical hardware to the iPhone. Google's OS borrowed a ton from iOS. The charging cable and charging brick was an exact rip-off. Oh scratch that - Samsungs are black. that's waaaay different. Samsung's packaging even magically changed to look just like Apple's. It's not about one or two things, nor is it about the ownership of rectangles.

 

But according to Samsung and Google, all of this is a mere coincidence.

 

I highly doubt it, but the court will have the final say.

post #38 of 117

Here’s the Sony phone Samsung say Apple copied in 2006:

 

700

 

 

And here’s Apple's early iPhone design from the previous year:

 

700

post #39 of 117

I can't help but think that the culture of piracy so endemic in Asian cultures is at work here. I can just see the Samsung executives indignant at the thought that they're doing anything out of the ordinary...their ordinary that is. Perhaps the outcome of this trial will send a chill throughout groups that see nothing wrong with these practices and force them to only seek the benefits of their own endeavors.

post #40 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

How long can we expect this trial to last?

 

That's the 3.5 billion dollar question.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Samsung takes excluded evidence to the media, gets reprimanded