or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Judge whittles Apple v. Samsung case down as Schiller concludes testimony [u]
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Judge whittles Apple v. Samsung case down as Schiller concludes testimony [u] - Page 2

post #41 of 97

Anyone making ignorant comments about Lucy Koh. She was born in Washington D.C. and attended Harvard. She most likely has never even been to Korea. So the shill for Samsung doesn't really hold water. Apple this was never going to be a win for Apple. Even if they got 400 Million that is a speeding ticket for Samsung.

 

However I do believe she is a shill for the Mayor of Toronto seeing she did make comment about smoking crack.

post #42 of 97
This judge is an absolute hack. She just seriously damaged Apple's case in the eyes of this jury by invalidating the pursuit of these patents after the trail had started - she has tainted the case. All of the evidence at trail, taken as a whole, proves that Samesung willfully stole Apple's IP and claimed it as their own by producing knockoff copies of the iPhone and iPad. She's a real POS.
post #43 of 97
Are u a
Quote:
Originally Posted by bighype View Post

Judge Koh sounds like a Samsung shill. Maybe she's defending her asians.

Are u a moron? Apple has more Asian employees than your sorry inbred ass! Not all Asians are Korean you dumb mkrom
post #44 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by fedupenuf View Post

This argument ' Apple argues that by copying its designs, Samsung has taken away a portion of the consumer base that would have otherwise purchased the iPhone or iPad.' , leads me to believe the Samsubg is 'as good or better' than the Apple. My HTC looks like that design but is admittedly a lower tier hardware device. So, no valid argument based on design. This is akin to comparing the Ford Fusion grille to the Aston Martin. Can Aston claim lost sales to a Ford just because the grille design is an obvious ripoff? I think not.

Go get yourself a good education before you make such stupid comments. Start by studying the evidence that was presented at trail. Samsung's own documents presented as evidence in the case showed how they deliberately and willfully set out to copy virtually every single aspect of the iPhone, down to the package design including the typeface. Samsung, and the Korean companies in general, are the most mistrusted in Asia due to their unethical and illegal business practices. Samsung has been prosecuted and fined around the world for their behavior in the past. Most recently they were fined by Taiwan for hiring college students to post fake negative blog posts against HTC. That is clear cut example of what a scumbag company they are - they consistently thumb their noses at the law.

 

Time for you to go back to school!

post #45 of 97
T
Quote:
Originally Posted by fedupenuf View Post

This argument ' Apple argues that by copying its designs, Samsung has taken away a portion of the consumer base that would have otherwise purchased the iPhone or iPad.' , leads me to believe the Samsubg is 'as good or better' than the Apple. My HTC looks like that design but is admittedly a lower tier hardware device. So, no valid argument based on design. This is akin to comparing the Ford Fusion grille to the Aston Martin. Can Aston claim lost sales to a Ford just because the grille design is an obvious ripoff? I think not.
That's like saying if I steal from someone who is rich it's not really stealing because hey that person has lots of money. Stealing is stealing even if ford ripped off the Aston grill and it doesn't hurt Aston it's still stealing. Samsung shouldn't be allowed to steal apple designs just because hey apple's rich and can take it.
post #46 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

So Samsung still guilty of infringing those four patents and will pay damages for having done so. Judge Koh only ruled that additional damages for lost profits on those four wasn't proven by Apple. That's quite different than the AI article implied.

If this is indeed the case, it wouldn't be the first time the shoddy "reporting" here got everyone in an uproar.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

 

Get the lowdown on the coming collapse:  http://www.cbo.gov/publication/45010

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

 

Get the lowdown on the coming collapse:  http://www.cbo.gov/publication/45010

Reply
post #47 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by w00master View PostCannot believe all of the racist comments on here.

 


Can't say I have seen any racist comments at all.
Yes, there are a few comments about race (asian/korean), but nothing that is racist.
post #48 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by khanzain View Post


Ford owns Aston Martin. So Aston can't claim anything.

They sold it in 2007.

45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #49 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by darthW View Post

T
That's like saying if I steal from someone who is rich it's not really stealing because hey that person has lots of money. Stealing is stealing even if ford ripped off the Aston grill and it doesn't hurt Aston it's still stealing. Samsung shouldn't be allowed to steal apple designs just because hey apple's rich and can take it.

 

If someone stole the grill from your Aston, you could take them to court.  Suppose they were found guilty of stealing it, what's next?  A decision has to be made how much the thief has to pay you back for stealing an Aston grill.

 

Samsung has already been ruled guilty and is a thief- the only question here is how much do they owe.

 

Samsungs argument is basically:  "An Astron grill costs $15,000 dollars- that is what we owe"

 

Apples argument is along the lines of:  "So much work went into designing that, that we deserve compensation for that.  Not only that, but the thief put our grill design on select Ford models and a whole bunch of people bought those models.  Clearly that is the major reason all those people bought Fords, if Ford had not sold all those models with Aston grills on them, all of those Ford buyers would have bought Aston Martin's instead so we deserve all those profits that we "lost"

 

That last part is the only thing the judge has thrown out by saying Apple didn't provide sufficient evidence to prove that claim.  All 5 of the patents are still 'valid' in terms of the case, Apple just can't run up the tab on 4 of the 5 them for lost profits (but all 5 will be used in the other calculations besides the lost profits argument)

post #50 of 97

Racism?... he was just letting off steam unlike you--do you love pulling out the race card Spammo?

post #51 of 97

I'm not sure which person you're referring to, but it is ridiculous to pay attention to the race of the judge regardless of if they're "blowing off steam". Similarly if the judge was White, you wouldn't claim that they are biased against a company that is not headquartered in the US. Certain comments irritate me in a unique way simply because they represent idiotic viewpoints that are entirely devoid of logic.

post #52 of 97

that's just rude.

post #53 of 97
I know I'm not the only cell phone user that's so very sick of all this mess with Apple vs Samsung everytime you turn around. It's really gotten old & stupid. I'm truly hoping this judge is the one to finally stop THE MADNESS. I own an I-phone 5 & I also own a Samsung Galaxy S-3. Right now I'm using my I-phone. I switch up about every 6 months or so. Both phones have their different qualities about them. I could make a list of things I like about one & the things I dis-like about the other. But that would really be pointless because this goes for every single cell phone out that that's made by a different company. I research cell phones before I go in for an up-grade. I liked the Samsung over the I-phone 4. And I didn't find a Droid I liked. So I purchased the Samsung. Then the I-phone 5 came out & I really liked the bigger screen & it had alot of features I loved; so I ended up just buying it outright from the Apple Store.

I have an upgrade next Sept. & right now there are two phones that are in the top running as of now. I know the I-phone 6 will be out & Verizon is also releasing another Samsung. But this time it may be one of the new Droids that's coming out that I may decide on. So I look at it like this. Apple NEEDS to quit crying foul everytime they have a bad sales quarter. That's the ONLY time they do this. And I know from talking with many other cell phone users that it's like Apple wants to be the ONLY company people buy their cell phones from. But that's NEVER going to happen, because EVERYONE has different tastes when buying ANY product. Bottom line is this. Apple is guilty of doing the same thing Samsung has already pleaded guilty to. Apple really needs to be concentrating on the NEW I-phone 6. They had NEVER suffered a quarter loss when Steve Jobs had the company. But they suffered TWO this past year. Bottom line is this: IT'S TIME TO PUT THIS MESS ASIDE & GET BACK TO THE BASICS OF WHAT APPLE DOES WELL. AND THAT'S MAKING APPLE PRODUCTS PERIOD. Have a great day everyone.
post #54 of 97

And you are an idiot.

post #55 of 97
Too bad none of the legal geniuses here can cite chapter and verse of the judge's alleged judicial malfeasance. Because that would really go a long way to elucidating the topic of her "consulting for Samsung".
post #56 of 97
i wonder if this is a deal between apple and samsung:

samsung: because we really need your manufacturing partnership to stay afloat, we'll make you a deal: we publicly apologize for stealing your designs to appear contrite and guilty%u2014we appear honorable and just, you agree to make some concessions (insert koh here) on your lawsuit to give the appearance of being defeated, therefore humbled and contrite. after a few weeks, we continue a mutually beneficial business partnership.

c'mon, tim, we all know we kick ass over your other manufacturing partners. waddaya say?

tim: ok, but you need be spanked a little. how about we have judge koh make it 1 instead of 5? if thats works for ya, i think we have a deal.
post #57 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by bighype View Post

Judge Koh sounds like a Samsung shill. Maybe she's defending her asians.

Racist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MazeCookie View Post

Judge Koh is the first District Court Judge of Korean descent. Coincidence? I think not.

Racist
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post

Not so sure that the comments about Judge Koh are racist in the strictest sense. She's not being denigrated because of some perceived inferiority based on her race. She's being accused of being biased because of a race-based conflict of interest. Psychology has long shown that people instinctively cut others slack if they share some profound commonality with them. Judges obviously have to fight against this in themselves constantly. But because the argument is between two parties who represent Korean and American interests, even the perception of bias should be avoided. A wise Judge would put that perception before any ego-based impulse to prove that her racial/cultural background does not effect her fairness.

Seriously? So then white people can't decide cases if either party is white.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabrfan30 View Post

Apple NEEDS to quit crying foul everytime they have a bad sales quarter. ..They had NEVER suffered a quarter loss when Steve Jobs had the company. But they suffered TWO this past year. Bottom line is this: IT'S TIME TO PUT THIS MESS ASIDE & GET BACK TO THE BASICS OF WHAT APPLE DOES WELL. AND THAT'S MAKING APPLE PRODUCTS PERIOD. Have a great day everyone.

Aren't you a troll. A "bad" sales qtr is still more successful than most companies' record qtr. oh and how is selling more iPhones than the previous year bad again?

A decrease in growth != a loss. Why can't folks understand that? A "steve jobs never" meme again.
post #58 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeeJay2012 View Post

Was there no merit to the 4 patents she dismissed?
She obviously does not care that this looks biased, but is she legally correct to do so?

I had heard this before, yes, can't believe Denise cole is judging this case.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bighype View Post

Judge Koh sounds like a Samsung shill. Maybe she's defending her asians.
post #59 of 97
What is wrong with us Apple fans???!!! We are turning Apple to become our idol, that nothing can top that. please, Apple fans! Do not despise Samsung or Asians, our Apple products are mostly made in China! We are contradicting ourselves! How much would Apple willing to pay for their employees? our products are cheaper than it is, even though it is outsourced. We are blinded by the articles that we read from just AI, we need to compare with other websites. Please do not be blinded by just one article. More Apple fans will become extremist. Sad to say, not defending Samsung, but seeing a bigger picture of the whole world. You can shoot all you want about other competitors, but it is clear that we need to do our own research on all products before we make our own statements.
post #60 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post



I suppose if she was your friend, you would think of her as your "Korean friend". The judge is from the US. She's of Korean descent. All I can add is that you may want to think on that. I don't see how anyone could fail to grasp the concept given enough time.



She's not Korean outside of race. Do you refer to Black people as African? I'm familiar with the term "African American", but I suspect you do not expect your colleagues to send you spam email just because of their skin color. Your assertion here has about the same amount of validity. Right now you are pegging someone to a geographic location where they didn't grow up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

Racist.
Racist
Seriously? So then white people can't decide cases if either party is white.
Aren't you a troll. A "bad" sales qtr is still more successful than most companies' record qtr. oh and how is selling more iPhones than the previous year bad again?

A decrease in growth != a loss. Why can't folks understand that? A "steve jobs never" meme again.

Let me clarify.
Racism is stereotyping an entire race. Racism is generalisation regarding race. Racism is NOT talking about a race.

I can talk about any race as much as I like, it is not offensive to anyone, nor is it racism until I generalise an entire race.

I would just like to point out, I'm talking about one person. If anyone thinks this thread has had any racism I suggest renerolling at your local school.
post #61 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by galron View Post

What is wrong with us Apple fans???!!! We are turning Apple to become our idol, that nothing can top that. please, Apple fans! Do not despise Samsung or Asians, our Apple products are mostly made in China! We are contradicting ourselves! How much would Apple willing to pay for their employees? our products are cheaper than it is, even though it is outsourced. We are blinded by the articles that we read from just AI, we need to compare with other websites. Please do not be blinded by just one article. More Apple fans will become extremist. Sad to say, not defending Samsung, but seeing a bigger picture of the whole world. You can shoot all you want about other competitors, but it is clear that we need to do our own research on all products before we make our own statements.

Nothing against your point about being blinded, I think that is valid.

But regarding products made in China, Tim Cook has said they are made there not because of price but because the skills are not in the US. My best guess is Apple will move most manufacturing to the US by 2020.
post #62 of 97

Obviously seem like the Korean goons must have gotten to her! How would she like if someone copies her Judgementship? What I guess we really don't want that to happen - It will put all American innovations in the hands of Koreans

post #63 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoffdino View Post
 

So with Samsung admitting guilt, does it mean that there is no appeal possible? Yes, they may appeal the damage, but will they be able to appeal the "guilty" verdict from the first trial? Any I will never buy a product from Samscrum.


You might not, but Apple will.

post #64 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by MazeCookie View Post


Let me clarify.
Racism is stereotyping an entire race. Racism is generalisation regarding race. Racism is NOT talking about a race.

I can talk about any race as much as I like, it is not offensive to anyone, nor is it racism until I generalise an entire race.

I would just like to point out, I'm talking about one person. If anyone thinks this thread has had any racism I suggest renerolling at your local school.

Interesting combination of patronizing and wrong.
post #65 of 97
Mikey, thanks for the clarifications, the article is much more clear and accurate now!
post #66 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by bighype View Post

Judge Koh sounds like a Samsung shill. Maybe she's defending her asians.
She is Korean American, other Asians have different culture and moral than Koreans, I think she has been biased.
post #67 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

There's no call for racism.
I am Asian, but won't agreed with her as she is behaving like there is a hidden agenda
post #68 of 97
Apple should sue her and tell the court to ask her to disclose hers and immediate family members' bank accounts, plus all phone conversations with the Samscum team and hired lawyers.
post #69 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doctor David View Post

Interesting combination of patronizing and wrong.

Interesting statement, shame it is unfounded. If you would like to elaborate your point, that might be useful.
post #70 of 97
I will never buy another product from Samsung either. No decent American should.
post #71 of 97
What does the ethnicity of the judge has to do with the courts?
Those who use the race card is nothing short of ignorant. Is that the best argument you can give?

Quote:
Originally Posted by water cooler View Post


She is Korean American, other Asians have different culture and moral than Koreans, I think she has been biased.

Talk about generalization. You been around the block? Get off your high pedestal.

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply
post #72 of 97

Her

 

Here is the skinny. Steve Jobs recruited a variety of people to join the of Apple Board. One example is Al Gore who promoted the internet to fellow senators. Others were fellow industry leaders. Example: Bill Gates of Microsoft.

 

Here is where the story gets darker.

 

CEO Eric Schmidt CO of Google - the search engine company - joined the Apple board about year 2005, Schmidt was their to witness the development of a revolutionary phone. The iPhone was launched in the middle of year 2007. Schmidt left the board a while later, still Google CEO.

 

A few years later Google launched a new product – Android – and gave it away for free. Was not a phone but had all the makings of an iPhone.

 

Currently Samsung is, in fact, the runner up market leader behind iPhone. I am not impressed with Samsung’s success. I know how they got there - with someone else’s idea.

post #73 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by MazeCookie View Post


Let me clarify.
Racism is stereotyping an entire race. Racism is generalisation regarding race. Racism is NOT talking about a race.

I can talk about any race as much as I like, it is not offensive to anyone, nor is it racism until I generalise an entire race.

I would just like to point out, I'm talking about one person. If anyone thinks this thread has had any racism I suggest renerolling at your local school.

Wrong. You think she has a bias because she's Korean. If the judge was white or black, that "bias" thought would not have crept up in your mind.
Let me guess, you're probably white so you think you know how minorities feel.
post #74 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post


Wrong. You think she has a bias because she's Korean. If the judge was white or black, that "bias" thought would not have crept up in your mind.
Let me guess, you're probably white so you think you know how minorities feel.

I am making a connection between the nationality of a company and the nationality of a person. It has no further meaning than that. Stop looking for something more. It doesn't need to include the rest of the race of Koreans. It was merely an observation.

 

If (like he did), Obama veto's a ban on Apple products, vs Samsung case, I make an observation and say, oh, hey, Obama is the president of the US (i.e., favouring America): isn't that a coincidence. I am not being racist towards Americans. (Yes, I know in this case the patent was FRAND, which is why he vetoed, but I am still entitled to that observation).

 

Similarly in this case a judge of Korean descent has favoured a Korean company. I have made an observation. I'm sure the real reason is valid, for her to rule with Samsung on the patents, but again, I am entitled to that observation, and it doesn't have to be racist.

 

/overandout

post #75 of 97

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by water cooler View Post


She is Korean American, other Asians have different culture and moral than Koreans, I think she has been biased.

You make a lot of claims that just rely on the general tone of the articles as evidence, then allude to race/cultural heritage/whatever you want to call it as opposed to real proof or even simple anecdotes. Do you think this stuff through?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by water cooler View Post


I am Asian, but won't agreed with her as she is behaving like there is a hidden agenda

What's ridiculous is that you still don't realize that it's irrelevant. Everyone claiming a hidden agenda is doing so from whatever AI posts. They aren't looking through every court document. Further even if she was biased in some way, that would not prove that it stems from her race. Your conclusions lack any real basis.

post #76 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by MazeCookie View Post

I am making a connection between the nationality of a company and the nationality of a person. It has no further meaning than that. Stop looking for something more. It doesn't need to include the rest of the race of Koreans. It was merely an observation.

If (like he did), Obama veto's a ban on Apple products, vs Samsung case, I make an observation and say, oh, hey, Obama is the president of the US (i.e., favouring America): isn't that a coincidence. I am not being racist towards Americans. (Yes, I know in this case the patent was FRAND, which is why he vetoed, but I am still entitled to that observation).

Similarly in this case a judge of Korean descent has favoured a Korean company. I have made an observation. I'm sure the real reason is valid, for her to rule with Samsung on the patents, but again, I am entitled to that observation, and it doesn't have to be racist.

/overandout

You may not be explicitly saying that, but you are inferring that because she is the same nationality as a party in the case, she can't be impartial. She's also American so if she ruled in favor of Apple, would you say she had a bias towards Apple? Of course not.
post #77 of 97

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MazeCookie View Post
 

I am making a connection between the nationality of a company and the nationality of a person. It has no further meaning than that. Stop looking for something more. It doesn't need to include the rest of the race of Koreans. It was merely an observation.

 

If (like he did), Obama veto's a ban on Apple products, vs Samsung case, I make an observation and say, oh, hey, Obama is the president of the US (i.e., favouring America): isn't that a coincidence. I am not being racist towards Americans. (Yes, I know in this case the patent was FRAND, which is why he vetoed, but I am still entitled to that observation).

 

Similarly in this case a judge of Korean descent has favoured a Korean company. I have made an observation. I'm sure the real reason is valid, for her to rule with Samsung on the patents, but again, I am entitled to that observation, and it doesn't have to be racist.

 

/overandout

 

Veto isn't an accurate term there, in spite of having been reported that way. You can only veto a bill. I'm not sure if he discouraged an injunction there, but I can look it up. What you completely miss (assuming you aren't trolling) is that the judge is American. According to the Wiki pages, she was born in DC. American isn't really a race, but that doesn't matter either. If you were trying to prove something, it would require more than an observation. As it is right now you're just writing libelous nonsense without any evidence or really logical connection.

post #78 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

You may not be explicitly saying that, but you are inferring that because she is the same nationality as a party in the case, she can't be impartial. She's also American so if she ruled in favor of Apple, would you say she had a bias towards Apple? Of course not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post



Veto isn't an accurate term there, in spite of having been reported that way. You can only veto a bill. I'm not sure if he discouraged an injunction there, but I can look it up. What you completely miss (assuming you aren't trolling) is that the judge is American. According to the Wiki pages, she was born in DC. American isn't really a race, but that doesn't matter either. If you were trying to prove something, it would require more than an observation. As it is right now you're just writing libelous nonsense without any evidence or really logical connection.

Let me clear something up, my original comment was light hearted and in a jokingly manner. It's like comment #4 or something, check it out. I apologise if it did not come across that way. I in no way believe she is biased towards Samsung because of her heritage. I am merely defending the point I am not being racist.

Whether you want to look into it in its deepest possible respect and try and look for racism, as I said, I am making a connection between an attribute of a person and a company.
post #79 of 97

Here is the skinny. Steve Jobs recruited a variety of people to join the of Apple Board. One example is Al Gore who promoted the internet to fellow senators. Others were fellow industry leaders. Example: Bill Gates of Microsoft.

 

Here is where the story gets darker.

 

CEO Eric Schmidt CO of Google - the search engine company - joined the Apple board about year 2005, Schmidt was their to witness the development of a revolutionary phone. The iPhone was launched in the middle of year 2007. Schmidt left the board a while later, still Google CEO.

 

A few years later Google launched a new product – Android – and gave it away for free. Was not a phone but had all the makings of an iPhone.

 

Currently Samsung is, in fact, the runner up market leader behind iPhone. I am not impressed with Samsung’s success. I know how they got there - with someone else’s idea.

Here is the skinny. Steve Jobs recruited a variety of people to join the of Apple Board. One example is Al Gore who promoted the internet to fellow senators. Others were fellow industry leaders. Example: Bill Gates of Microsoft.

 

Here is where the story gets darker.

 

CEO Eric Schmidt CO of Google - the search engine company - joined the Apple board about year 2005, Schmidt was their to witness the development of a revolutionary phone. The iPhone was launched in the middle of year 2007. Schmidt left the board a while later, still Google CEO.

 

A few years later Google launched a new product – Android – and gave it away for free. Was not a phone but had all the makings of an iPhone.

 

Currently Samsung is, in fact, the market leader behind iPhone. I am not impressed with Samsung’s success. I know how they got there - with someone else’s idea.

post #80 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by mac_dog View Post

that's just rude.


 


What is?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Judge whittles Apple v. Samsung case down as Schiller concludes testimony [u]