or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › UK judge who said Apple lacked integrity hired by Samsung [u]
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

UK judge who said Apple lacked integrity hired by Samsung [u]

post #1 of 66
Thread Starter 
The UK judge who ordered Apple to issue multiple statements saying that Samsung didn't copy the design of the iPad has been hired on by Samsung to act as an expert in an ITC investigation.

Update: Samsung on Thursday contacted International Business Times to clarify that: "Sir Robin Jacob is not a legal representative of Samsung Electronics. A highly reputed intellectual property expert and academic, Sir Robin has been contracted as an expert by a law firm that represents Samsung Electronics in its case against Ericsson."

Apple apology


The Rt. Hon. Professor Sir Robin Jacob has been brought on as one of nine "experts [...] working on behalf of" Samsung according to FOSS Patents. Samsung's counsel submitted the filing listing Jacob as an expert witness in court on Wednesday.

Jacob will act as an expert in the U.S. International Trade Commission's investigation of Ericsson's patent infringement complaint against Samsung. Ericsson is seeking a U.S. import ban against multiple Samsung smartphones and tablets, including the Galaxy S III, Galaxy Note II, and Galaxy Tab.In a court order, Jacob said he hoped Apple's "lack of integrity" was atypical.

In November of last year, Jacob ruled that Apple had failed to properly comply with a court order that it should prominently display on its website that Samsung had not copied the design of Apple's iPad. Apple had updated its site with a link at the bottom, sending users to a linkless, logoless page with a statement saying Samsung had not infringed.

The judge found Apple's wording in the statement insufficient, as well as its placement on Apple's web page. He ordered Apple to change the wording of the statement within two days, giving it an 11-point font and prominent display on the company's website front page.

Speaking on Apple's initial attempt at complying with the court order, Jacob's opinion read: "I hope that the lack of integrity involved in this incident is entirely atypical of Apple."
post #2 of 66
Shame
post #3 of 66

Hahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahaha...

 

When nothing remains but incredulity, laugh it off! lol.gif

Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
Where are we on the curve? We'll know once it goes asymptotic!
Reply
post #4 of 66

Which goes to show, he certainly knows all about lack of integrity...

post #5 of 66
Wow. I smell appeals. When did Sammy offer the job?
post #6 of 66
Can anyone in the UK explain how this can possibly not be a conflict of interest for this ex-judge? Are there really no rules against future employment by parties that have come before your court?
post #7 of 66

Like it or not, what this shows is Samsung is hungry, it competes to win, and doesn't sit around wringing its hands.

 

Apple needs to learn a thing or two about hardball tactics. I am somewhat befuddled by how passive the company seems to be (and what a 'zero-personality' image it projects) under Cook.

 

G-A-P*, Apple!

 

 

 

*grow a.....

post #8 of 66

Whether or not he was a Samsung employee at the time of the trial, being discovered as one so soon after the trial is clearly a problem for anyone with ethics. After his bizarre exercise in trying to publicly humiliate Apple, I guess ethics is not a problem for this clown.

post #9 of 66
There is no conflict of interest, this occurs after the trial. If it wa before or during the trial then yes it would be a conflict of interest.

J
post #10 of 66

deleted


Edited by MacRulez - 7/5/13 at 3:37pm
post #11 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

Wow. I smell appeals. When did Sammy offer the job?

4 months later it says in the article. As it rightly states though, there's no evidence to suggest the judge was paid off during the legal process with Apple but the distasteful thing is that the judge issued a pretty unfair ruling against Apple and Samsung (or their reps) is now hiring that person as an expert in another case. Obviously they'd hire people who support their own side but it just seems like the judge's previous ruling might have had a little bias towards Samsung, which at the time seemed fairly clear in light of the overly harsh ruling and the language they used in their ruling.

One of the other experts is called Keith R. Ugone, maybe he'll be a little more impartial in the proceedings. Nobody knows where he is though.
post #12 of 66

The day starts to get better and better.

 

But then again, I am not really surprised by this. Sammy is known to be corrupt even in Korea. So, why should they suddenly start to play nice?

post #13 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Like it or not, what this shows is Samsung is hungry, it competes to win, and doesn't sit around wringing its hands.

 

Apple needs to learn a thing or two about hardball tactics. I am somewhat befuddled by how passive the company seems to be (and what a 'zero-personality' image it projects) under Cook.

 

G-A-P*, Apple!

 

 

 

*grow a.....

 

 

Yeah, being a crook is awesome!

I prefer him to stay Cook, instead.

 

But yeah, i think i understand you.

Cook does not have the non nonsense-fuckYou personality of Jobs. And cowards see afffable people as weak.

post #14 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Like it or not, what this shows is Samsung is hungry, it competes to win, and doesn't sit around wringing its hands.

Apple needs to learn a thing or two about hardball tactics. I am somewhat befuddled by how passive the company seems to be (and what a 'zero-personality' image it projects) under Cook.

G-A-P*, Apple!



*grow a.....

Passive? Apparently you've been sleeping in a cave somewhere the last few years.
post #15 of 66
I don't know if you can hire a referee.
post #16 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamjam View Post

There is no conflict of interest, this occurs after the trial. If it wa before or during the trial then yes it would be a conflict of interest.

J

 

 

That is BS. Judges are abound by ethics standards including not engaging in appearances of impropriety. At least that is how it is in the US. There would be serious problems with ruling in favor of a certain party just to be hired by that party shortly thereafter. 

post #17 of 66
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post
I smell appeals.

 

Can't. Because "rules".

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #18 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Like it or not, what this shows is Samsung is hungry, it competes to win, and doesn't sit around wringing its hands.

 

Apple needs to learn a thing or two about hardball tactics. I am somewhat befuddled by how passive the company seems to be (and what a 'zero-personality' image it projects) under Cook.

 

G-A-P*, Apple!

 

 

 

*grow a.....

 

What an absolutely vile thing to say.  1oyvey.gif

 

Obviously you need to be using Google's products instead of Apple's since you appear to be so scared of emasculation.  

post #19 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Like it or not, what this shows is Samsung is hungry, it competes to win, and doesn't sit around wringing its hands.

Apple needs to learn a thing or two about hardball tactics. I am somewhat befuddled by how passive the company seems to be (and what a 'zero-personality' image it projects) under Cook.

G-A-P*, Apple!



*grow a.....

Yeah! Apple needs to learn how the cutthroat game is played! Anything to win!
post #20 of 66
Is there any Apple news in AppleInsider?

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #21 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamjam View Post

There is no conflict of interest, this occurs after the trial. If it wa before or during the trial then yes it would be a conflict of interest.

J

Excellent analysis. Nothing to comment on here!
post #22 of 66

deleted


Edited by MacRulez - 7/5/13 at 3:37pm
post #23 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

Is there any Apple news in AppleInsider?

Never. They just love whine about how sociopaths will always win. Wimps!
post #24 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


4 months later it says in the article. As it rightly states though, there's no evidence to suggest the judge was paid off during the legal process with Apple but the distasteful thing is that the judge issued a pretty unfair ruling against Apple and Samsung (or their reps) is now hiring that person as an expert in another case. Obviously they'd hire people who support their own side but it just seems like the judge's previous ruling might have had a little bias towards Samsung, which at the time seemed fairly clear in light of the overly harsh ruling and the language they used in their ruling.

 

Any "payoff" during the trial isn't going to be easily traceable money but a very deniable and untraceable promise of a lucrative contract after retirement.

post #25 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

 

What an absolutely vile thing to say.  1oyvey.gif

 

If you think that post was 'vile', then you need to stop taking criticism of Apple to heart so much...

post #26 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRulez View Post

Oddly, AI recently added an update clarifying that the judge wasn't actually hired by Samsung, but curiously (perhaps not so curiously) left the erroneous headline in place.

 
Edit:  as usual, when you want accurate reporting you have to go to the outside world - MacRumors once again had a more reliable headline:  "UK Judge Who Chastised Apple Over Samsung 'Apology' Now Consulting as Patent Expert for Samsung"

In what way are the headlines at AI and Macrumors materially different. Samsung's lawyers are paying this judge with Samsung's money. Is anything really changed in this ethically bankrupt situation by which company's name appears on the check?
post #27 of 66

I guess I'm a little surprised that a judge would be permitted to work as a legal consultant in an area that he may preside over. Or is he no longer a judge?

post #28 of 66

deleted


Edited by MacRulez - 7/5/13 at 3:37pm
post #29 of 66
Wait... Ericcson is sueing Samsung?

I though Apple was the only company on the entire planet who ever sued anyone for anything?

... and why aren't there headlines on every major news site about this Ericcson/Samsung trial? Shouldn't it be HUGE front page super exciting news like all patent litigation?
post #30 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

One of the other experts is called Keith R. Ugone, maybe he'll be a little more impartial in the proceedings. Nobody knows where he is though.

 

 lol.gif

post #31 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


4 months later it says in the article. As it rightly states though, there's no evidence to suggest the judge was paid off during the legal process with Apple but the distasteful thing is that the judge issued a pretty unfair ruling against Apple and Samsung (or their reps) is now hiring that person as an expert in another case. Obviously they'd hire people who support their own side but it just seems like the judge's previous ruling might have had a little bias towards Samsung, which at the time seemed fairly clear in light of the overly harsh ruling and the language they used in their ruling.

One of the other experts is called Keith R. Ugone, maybe he'll be a little more impartial in the proceedings. Nobody knows where he is though.

 

May have not been "paid off" during trial, but I bet you Sammy knew this would be coming up and they would use him at a "premium" rate.  SO the payoff would be afterwords, not during.

You don't want to make me curmudgeon, you would not like me when I am curmudgeon.  I go all caps, bold, with a 72PT font and green lettering.  

Reply

You don't want to make me curmudgeon, you would not like me when I am curmudgeon.  I go all caps, bold, with a 72PT font and green lettering.  

Reply
post #32 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

 

What an absolutely vile thing to say.  1oyvey.gif

G-A-P.1smile.gif

post #33 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

I guess I'm a little surprised that a judge would be permitted to work as a legal consultant in an area that he may preside over. Or is he no longer a judge?

 

He is retired, although he was brought back just to do the Apple design patent case, since he's an expert in his field.

 

Retired judges in the US are also usually allowed to be paid consultants.

 

I was going to say that he probably should avoid consulting for Apple or Samsung, but then again, if he's done patent cases for decades, it would be pretty hard to avoid all the companies he ever adjudicated over.

post #34 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

I guess I'm a little surprised that a judge would be permitted to work as a legal consultant in an area that he may preside over. Or is he no longer a judge?

 

Robert Raphael Hayim "Robin" Jacob (born 26 April 1941), now styled The Rt Hon. Professor Sir Robin Jacob, was as Lord Justice Jacob a judge in the Court of Appeal of England and Wales.[1]

His primary area of expertise is intellectual property rights. He was admitted to the IP Hall of Fame in 2006.[2]

He retired from the Court of Appeal in March 2011 (acknowledged in a valedictory address[3] before a court-room packed with well-wishers) to take up his current position as the SirHugh Laddie Chair in intellectual property at University College London[4] However, in accordance with section 9 of the Senior Courts Act 1981, he has continued on occasion since that date to sit as a judge in the High Court and the Court of Appeal. Sir Robin is currently a Door Tenant at 8 New Square Chambers. [5]

 

He is retired. And he is an expert in IP. So, yes he can be consulted for his expertise.

post #35 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

 

Any "payoff" during the trial isn't going to be easily traceable money but a very deniable and untraceable promise of a lucrative contract after retirement.

 

Perhaps there are connections within the local Masonic Lodge... there are often rumors circulating in the UK of British judges and policemen with one trouser leg rolled-up, giving secret handshakes and thus being involved in Freemasonry... Boaz!

post #36 of 66
Here's what one set of judges thought of the _appearance of impropriety._

http://www.luc.edu/law/media/law/students/publications/llj/pdfs/moore_appearance.pdf

During the revision process, the Commission solicited comment on a number of provisions that had provoked extensive discussion and controversy in Commission hearings and meetings, including a provision in the 1990 Judicial Code that admonished judges to avoid not only impropriety, but also the appearance of impropriety.

The majority of commentators supported retaining the admonition to avoid even the appearance of impropriety, including enforcing this admonition through judicial discipline.
post #37 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleh1234 View Post

He is retired. And he is an expert in IP. So, yes he can be consulted for his expertise.

You got it.

 

Lots of stupid hyperventilating here about the ethicality and such. Even if anyone has an issue of ethicality, it is him, not Samsung.

post #38 of 66
Sir Robin has been contracted as an expert by a law firm that represents Samsung Electronics in its case against Ericsson.

 

Oh.  Too bad.  Would have been better if he were hired as an actual member of Samsung's legal team.

That way he would have been incapable of doing any further harm.

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #39 of 66

Is that the douchebag UK judge who made Apple take out those pathetic ads? I remember that a few people here were defending the decision at the time.

 

Well, now we know that the judge is indeed a douchebag. What's the difference between him and a 5 dollar crack whore? Nothing, they're both in it just for the money, though the crack whore might have a bit more integrity.

post #40 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fotoformat View Post

Perhaps there are connections within the local Masonic Lodge... there are often rumors circulating in the UK of British judges and policemen with one trouser leg rolled-up, giving secret handshakes and thus being involved in Freemasonry... Boaz!

 

You mock but that's how it works when a senior member of a federal agency or military "retires" and ends up working for the contractor they were supposedly the watchdog for.  

 

It is an accepted manner of corruption since it is essentially impossible to prove and difficult or illegal to discourage (i.e. not allowing them to work in the industry ever again).

 

Not saying that this is what happened but it happens often enough that a perception that an impropriety may have occurred because such things have happened so often in the past is not surprising.  

 

Folks with integrity try to keep away from scenarios of potential impropriety because while stepping over black on white line is obvious, stepping over a gray line is often too easy to do without knowing until after the fact.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › UK judge who said Apple lacked integrity hired by Samsung [u]