or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Samsung avoids sanctions in accidental Apple-Nokia patent licensing disclosure
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Samsung avoids sanctions in accidental Apple-Nokia patent licensing disclosure

post #1 of 25
Thread Starter 
A U.S. district court on Wednesday ordered Samsung will not be sanctioned for the disclosure of confidential Apple-Nokia patent licensing, and will instead place blame on the Korean tech giant's counsel Quinn Emmanuel.

Ahn


The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California ruled in favor of an Apple order to grant sanctions over the inadvertently leaked information, but did not go so far as to ding Samsung for the infraction. Samsung's law firm in both Apple v. Samsung trials, Quinn Emmanuel, will instead be sanctioned.

In his usual "man of the people" delivery, U.S. Magistrate Judge Paul S. Grewal wrote in the order that the dissemination of confidential information was inadvertent; a simple error in redaction.

"A junior associate missing one redaction among many in an expert report is not exactly a
historical event in the annals of big-ticket patent litigation," wrote Judge Paul S. Grewal. "Even if regrettable, these things can happen, and almost certainly do happen each and every day. But when such an inadvertent mistake is permitted to go unchecked, unaddressed, and propagated hundreds and hundreds of times by conscious - and indeed strategic - choices by that associate's firm and client alike, more significant and blameworthy flaws are revealed."

As noted by FOSS Patents' Florian Mueller, Judge Grewal Judge Grewal previously advocated for sanctions of some kind, suggesting Samsung itself should be responsible at least in part. However, upon further fact finding, it was concluded that evidence of misuse on the part of Samsung was "circumstantial," meaning the company is not considered a perpetrator.

In October 2013, a court order revealed Samsung's licensing executives got their hands on non-redacted documents containing sensitive information regarding stipulations of Apple and Nokia licensing deals. The papers, prepared by Dr. David J. Teece for Quinn Emmanuel, were meant solely for use in litigation by outside counsel, but were accidentally sent to high-ranking Samsung IP executives and other internal personnel.

Along with the sanctions, Judge Grewal ordered all copies of the Teece report containing confidential information to be permanently removed from Samsung control within two weeks.

To avoid future failings in redaction policy, counsel for both companies must send redacted versions of documents to each other's counsel before filing or distributing externally. The practice is applicable to the parties' two ongoing California cases.

Sanctions Over Breach of Apple-Nokia Licensing Information

post #2 of 25
A travesty of justice. Samsung can't "unsee" that material any more than a bell can be "unrung". The fact that Samsung executives made wide use of the information disclosed in licensing negotiations should have been sufficient cause for action.

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply

   Apple develops an improved programming language.  Google copied Java.  Everything you need to know, right there.

 

    AT&T believes their LTE coverage is adequate

Reply
post #3 of 25

Right now those convicts at Samsung headquarters are patting each other on the back and congratulation each other for getting away with it.

These judges are making a mockery of our system and Samsung is playing them.

post #4 of 25

I think you misspelt that 2nd to last word...should have been "paying them".

post #5 of 25
So, what he's saying is that stealing is bad and you get to pay costs but no penalty if you're caught, but handling stolen goods is completely OK.

Great legal brain. Great system.
post #6 of 25
The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced. Frank Zappa

There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the universe, and it has a longer shelf life.

Frank Zappa

Reply

There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the universe, and it has a longer shelf life.

Frank Zappa

Reply
post #7 of 25
So what sanctions, exactly, will Quinn Emmanuel face?
For your sake, I hope you're right.
Reply
For your sake, I hope you're right.
Reply
post #8 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carthusia View Post

So what sanctions, exactly, will Quinn Emmanuel face?
They'll reimburse Apple and Nokia for the attorney fees spent on litigating this particular complaint. For details see the end of page 17 thru page 19 of the AI linked sanction order, (repeated below).

As for Samsung's supposed transgression according to Judge Grewel there was no benefit to them from the leak since they already were given the licensing terms beforehand, having been advised of them by Ericsson sometime back. That's on page 10 of the AI linked doc.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/203366929/Sanctions-Over-Breach-of-Apple-Nokia-Licensing-Information

Appears the earlier posters hadn't bothered to read the court document before commenting.
Edited by Gatorguy - 1/30/14 at 5:17am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #9 of 25
Follow the money.
post #10 of 25

Yet another proof how much $$ Samsung is willing to spend to keep their A$$ out of troubles!

 

Someday someone somewhere is gonna share a lot of unseen / unheard info over all these .... mark my words!

....the lack of properly optimized apps is one of the reasons "why the experience on Android tablets is so crappy".

Tim Cook ~ The Wall Street Journal - February 7, 2014

Inside Google! 

Reply

....the lack of properly optimized apps is one of the reasons "why the experience on Android tablets is so crappy".

Tim Cook ~ The Wall Street Journal - February 7, 2014

Inside Google! 

Reply
post #11 of 25

So....the law form works for Samsung but they are blaming only the law firm...how is that not like blaming another company for worker rights issues at one of it's suppliers.  A contract is a contract.

post #12 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by DiegoG View Post

So....the law form works for Samsung but they are blaming only the law firm...how is that not like blaming another company for worker rights issues at one of it's suppliers.  A contract is a contract.

You (and Disturbia) should really read the court's sanction order, at least from page 17 on. I personally don't care for Samsung's business ethics, sprinkles of over-promising proclamations of the wonderful products to come, or their commitment to customer satisfaction. In this specific instance tho it appears Samsung themselves weren't benefiting from the Quinn Emanuel error which is why there were not sanctions against them.

Even with regard to Apple demands for satisfaction lodged against the law-firm the court said "The vast majority of these are ludicrously overbroad" and that "By the final hearing on December 9, 2013, this lack of clear evidence was obvious in the tone of the moving parties. Apple and Nokia’s allegations had shifted... In short, what began as a chorus of loud and certain accusations had died down to aggressive suppositions and inferences, and without anything more, Quinn Emanuel and Samsung cannot reasonably be subject to more punitive sanctions."
Edited by Gatorguy - 1/30/14 at 5:53am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #13 of 25
Edit: never mind 1wink.gif
post #14 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

You (and Disturbia) should really read the court's sanction order, at least from page 17 on. I personally don't care for Samsung's business ethics, sprinkles of over-promising proclamations of the wonderful products to come, or their commitment to customer satisfaction. In this specific instance tho it appears Samsung themselves weren't benefiting from the Quinn Emanuel error which is why there were not sanctions against them.

Even with regard to Apple demands for satisfaction lodged against the law-firm the court said "The vast majority of these are ludicrously overbroad" and that "By the final hearing on December 9, 2013, this lack of clear evidence was obvious in the tone of the moving parties. Apple and Nokia’s allegations had shifted... In short, what began as a chorus of loud and certain accusations had died down to aggressive suppositions and inferences, and without anything more, Quinn Emanuel and Samsung cannot reasonably be subject to more punitive sanctions."

Thanks for the thorough work, GatorGuy. Sad to see comments going off half-cocked ... or for that matter, half-testicled.

I admit to being a Fanatical Moderate. I Disdain the Inane. Vyizderzominymororzizazizdenderizorziz?

Reply

I admit to being a Fanatical Moderate. I Disdain the Inane. Vyizderzominymororzizazizdenderizorziz?

Reply
post #15 of 25
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post
Ahn
 

 

Reminder that they stole this image and slightly edited it to serve their own purposes.

post #16 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Reminder that they stole this image and slightly edited it to serve their own purposes.

Instead of "stolen" I'd guess that the image was based on stock art from some clearinghouse, which is why at least one other webpage from someone had a very similar image. I haven't othered looking around for it tho so it's certainly possible they used it without permission of the artist.
Edited by Gatorguy - 1/30/14 at 8:16am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #17 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


 ...... I haven't othered looking around for it tho so it's certainly possible they used it without permission of the artist.

Well, that would be in keeping to their profile, wouldn't it.  ;) 

Apple, bigger than Google, ..... bigger than Microsoft,   The universe is unfolding as it should. Thanks, Apple.
Reply
Apple, bigger than Google, ..... bigger than Microsoft,   The universe is unfolding as it should. Thanks, Apple.
Reply
post #18 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


You (and Disturbia) should really read the court's sanction order, at least from page 17 on. I personally don't care for Samsung's business ethics, sprinkles of over-promising proclamations of the wonderful products to come, or their commitment to customer satisfaction. In this specific instance tho it appears Samsung themselves weren't benefiting from the Quinn Emanuel error which is why there were not sanctions against them.

Even with regard to Apple demands for satisfaction lodged against the law-firm the court said "The vast majority of these are ludicrously overbroad" and that "By the final hearing on December 9, 2013, this lack of clear evidence was obvious in the tone of the moving parties. Apple and Nokia’s allegations had shifted... In short, what began as a chorus of loud and certain accusations had died down to aggressive suppositions and inferences, and without anything more, Quinn Emanuel and Samsung cannot reasonably be subject to more punitive sanctions."

 

A nice little compilation of the company you are hellbent on defending along with your apparently sycophantic, testicle obsessed minion.
 

 

  •  July 7, 2004: Jury advised of adverse interference when Samsung allowed emails to be automatically deleted even after it was told to retain relevant emails. After Samsung's appeal, Judge William Martini found "Samsung's actions go far beyond mere negligence, demonstrating knowing and intentional conduct."
  • October 17, 2005: The U.S. Department of Justice fined Samsung nearly $300M for memory price fixing within the U.S.
  • Feb. 7, 2007: U.S. government fined Samsung for $90M for memory chip price fixing for violations in 2006.
  • Jan.15, 2008: Samsung's offices in Korea were raided after evidence showed that a slush fund was used to bribe government officials and other business leaders.
  • July 16 2008, Samsung chairman, Lee Kun-he was found guilty in Seoul of financial wrongdoing and tax evasion. Despite prosecutor request of seven years in prison, sentence was reduced to three years followed by a pardon by the South Korean Government in 2009 to allow him to help with its successful bid to host the 2018 Winter Olympics. He is now a member of the International Olympic Committee and this 'pardoned criminal' returned as Samsung's Chairman in March 2010.
  • May 19, 2010: The EU Commission fined Samsung for being part of a cartel that shared confidential information and fixed memory chip prices (along with eight other firms).
  • Nov. 1, 2011: The Korean Fair Trade Commission fined Samsung for being part of a cartel that fixed prices and reduced output for TFT-LCD screens between 2001 and 2006.
  • March 15, 2012: The Korean Fair Trade Commission fined Samsung for a mobile phone price fixing scheme and consumer fraud whereby consumers would be paying more than what the discounted prices advertised.
  •  July 25, 2012: Magistrate Grewal informs the jury that they could take into account that "spoliation" of evidence occurred when Samsung destroyed evidence that could have been used in the Apple lawsuit; Samsung had a policy of automatically deleting emails that were two weeks old and should have suspended that policy between August 2010 (when Apple informed Samsung of patent infringement) and April 2011 (when Apple initiated the lawsuit).
  • August 24, 2012 a jury returned a verdict finding Samsung had willfully infringed on Apple's design and utility patents and had also diluted Apple's trade dresses related to the iPhone. But Samsung continues to fight the ruling, and continues in their copying behavior.
  • Dec 2012: EU issued a Statement of Objections (SO) against Samsung for abusing its Standard-Essential Patents in not providing FRAND rates. Samsung withdrew all SEP-based injunction requests against Apple in Europe days before the SO was issued, but to no avail.
  • April. 2013, Samsung is accused of and admits hiring people in several countries to falsify reports of HTC phones "constantly crashing" and posting fake benchmark reviews.
  • October 2013 Samsung in confirmed reports from independent and objective testing, found to be intentionally falsifying performance benchmarks of its flagship products: the Galaxy S4 and Note 3.

Thanks again to TeeJay2000 and to FOSS Patents' Florian Mueller, who has the text of the judge's order.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #19 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post

A nice little compilation of the company you are hellbent on defending along with your apparently sycophantic, testicle obsessed minion.
"http://www.fosspatents.com/2014/01/us-court-declines-to-sanction-samsung.html" style="color:rgb(0,66,118);margin:0px;padding:0px;vertical-align:baseline;" target="_blank">FOSS Patents
' Florian Mueller, who has the text of the judge's order.

Hell-bent on defending Samsung?! You don't bother reading what you're quoting before commenting do you? 1rolleyes.gif

I said "I personally don't care for Samsung's business ethics, sprinkles of over-promising proclamations of the wonderful products to come, or their commitment to customer satisfaction. In this specific instance tho it appears Samsung themselves weren't benefiting from the Quinn Emanuel error which is why there were not sanctions against them."

In addition, AI linked the same exact court order that Mueller did. Look at the bottom of the article. Where do you think I got my info? Reading the AI-linked court sanction order. If you weren't so hell-bent on attacking you probably would have noted it, along with my mention of the exact pages where the court order quotes came from.

Geez o'Pete.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #20 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal View Post
 

Right now those convicts at Samsung headquarters are patting each other on the back and congratulation each other for getting away with it.

These judges are making a mockery of our system and Samsung is playing them.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dogchop99 View Post
 

I think you misspelt that 2nd to last word...should have been "paying them".

 

Yes, Samsung is getting off easy. But to accuse the judges of making a mockery of the judicial system shows ignorant bias. Try to understand the law and history of such cases before you jump to conclusion. Or perhaps you care more about blind worship than reality?

post #21 of 25

If you're calling that blind worship, maybe you should take those Rose Tinted Glasses you view the U.S. Judicial system with and consider:

(i) that Samsung is an incredibly corrupt company - it's leaders legal entanglements in it's own country are testimony to that...

 

AND

 

(ii) they have the money to throw back handers at anyone 'including' so-called judges, that continually seem to make a mockery of the so-called legal and justice system in America.

 

No-one is looking at this blindly - apart from yourself!

post #22 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by StruckPaper View Post
 

 

 

 

Yes, Samsung is getting off easy. But to accuse the judges of making a mockery of the judicial system shows ignorant bias. Try to understand the law and history of such cases before you jump to conclusion. Or perhaps you care more about blind worship than reality?

 

 

If you're calling that blind worship, maybe you should take those Rose Tinted Glasses you view the U.S. Judicial system with and consider:

(i) that Samsung is an incredibly corrupt company - it's leaders legal entanglements in it's own country are testimony to that...

 

AND

 

(ii) they have the money to throw back handers at anyone 'including' so-called judges, that continually seem to make a mockery of the so-called legal and justice system in America.

 

No-one is looking at this blindly - apart from yourself!

post #23 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by dogchop99 View Post
 

 

 

If you're calling that blind worship, maybe you should take those Rose Tinted Glasses you view the U.S. Judicial system with and consider:

(i) that Samsung is an incredibly corrupt company - it's leaders legal entanglements in it's own country are testimony to that...

 

AND

 

(ii) they have the money to throw back handers at anyone 'including' so-called judges, that continually seem to make a mockery of the so-called legal and justice system in America.

 

No-one is looking at this blindly - apart from yourself!

Are you accusing US judges of taking backhanders from Samsung?  That's a very serious accusation.  I assume you have evidence to back that up, care to share it?

post #24 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by reefoid View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by dogchop99 View Post
 

 

 

If you're calling that blind worship, maybe you should take those Rose Tinted Glasses you view the U.S. Judicial system with and consider:

(i) that Samsung is an incredibly corrupt company - it's leaders legal entanglements in it's own country are testimony to that...

 

AND

 

(ii) they have the money to throw back handers at anyone 'including' so-called judges, that continually seem to make a mockery of the so-called legal and justice system in America.

 

No-one is looking at this blindly - apart from yourself!

Are you accusing US judges of taking backhanders from Samsung?  That's a very serious accusation.  I assume you have evidence to back that up, care to share it?

of course he hasnt the evidence. Spurious libellous comments are all the evidence he requires. Fact 😂
post #25 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by reefoid View Post
 

Are you accusing US judges of taking backhanders from Samsung?  That's a very serious accusation.  I assume you have evidence to back that up, care to share it?

 

Remember that UK judge who forced Apple to carry an apology to Samsung on their website, what was his name?

 

He went on to work for Samsung in the US.

 

A nice little earner, as the poms would say.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Samsung avoids sanctions in accidental Apple-Nokia patent licensing disclosure