That Samsung's lawyers keep asking how much the Apple experts are paid should be inadmissible. The fact they are compensated has nothing to with their expertise. But then again, they cant win on facts, only on innuendo and obfuscation.
That Samsung's lawyers keep asking how much the Apple experts are paid should be inadmissible. The fact they are compensated has nothing to with their expertise. But then again, they cant win on facts, only on innuendo and obfuscation.
That's not true. They also have outright lies on their side. Like the attorney lying to the judge about the date a picture was taken.
If Samsung start of quoting to the jury that rectangles are the core of Apple's issues but then the jury starts seeing all the other evidence of copying then the jury will think that Samsung are trying to purposely mislead them.
Also, as others have stated, emails are seldom considered "business records" (claim files, contacts, financial records, etc). As such, you are not required to preserve them as a matter of your normal business process. They are however, subject to discovery and as such you are required to preserve them if they are related to a legal issue (or I guess from thsi article, a potential legal issue).
This. Email is not a record, and not required to be maintained qua email, it is a medium, and may contain record material. Generally though this is not the case. Liability is one of the reasons you don't want to keep emails around forever, but really an email can just as easily save you as damn you. The real reason for not keeping emails (or any other non-record information) permanently is the cost of discovery. You have to sweep everything reasonably accessible than start to filter down as counsel defines the scope of the preservation (under cfr rule 26), and the bulk of that stuff is going to have to be reviewed by lawyers for relevance at a fat hourly rate.
What you do keep as a record is governed by both regulation and law, business need, and the amount of risk you are willing to assume. Section 802 pertains to records related to SEC filings and other financial reporting, not to all email. Two weeks is a short but not uncommon retention period for email in third part email management tools; I see typically 3 weeks to a month for the inbox, longer when moved into another folder, and then actual records get declared against content types governed by the company retention schedule.
Honestly, most large companies have legal preservation practices that are largely inadequate to their size and needs. It is more the norm that a preservation causes sturm and drang rather than the execution of well defined processes.
I wish the name of the writer would appear in the title of the news.
I tend to read the thing, wonder why it's so ridiculously slanted, and then notice it's from DED.
Short description:
"Bad Samsung wanna use same tactics as good Apple. Samsung is wrong anyway, why even try them? Kill them all! Oh, and let's use latin to end this argument as a pro. Who cares about balance anyway?"
Nyuh. I hope I'm not the only one who thinks more analyses and less DED-slander would serve Ai well?
I did some SarbOx comliancy missions in the past. Always thought that it just related to financial disclosure and not, as you seem to suggest, to claims between companies over a patent.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by TwoPM
World Police USA.
People are always welcome to go do their business somewhere else. If you want to do business here, you have to act according to our rules.
Incidentally, that is no different from how laws operate in your country, which I assume is Korea.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PowerMach
Sarbanes-Oxley Act, Section 802 deals with retention for public and private companies in the U.S.A.
It is not clear if that section of S-Ox applies to ADRs (which is how Samsung is traded in the US).
That Samsung's lawyers keep asking how much the Apple experts are paid should be inadmissible. The fact they are compensated has nothing to with their expertise. But then again, they cant win on facts, only on innuendo and obfuscation.
It just seems that Samsung keeps digging their grave here because they have nothing to counter their blatant theft of Apple's IP
Lol is there anything Samsung won't copy?
That's not true. They also have outright lies on their side. Like the attorney lying to the judge about the date a picture was taken.
If Samsung start of quoting to the jury that rectangles are the core of Apple's issues but then the jury starts seeing all the other evidence of copying then the jury will think that Samsung are trying to purposely mislead them.
Anyone want to comment on the picture here and how obvious it is that Samsung copied the iPhone look and feel? A picture is worth a thousand words...
What's next? Samsung announce that they are suing Samsung?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin
Also, as others have stated, emails are seldom considered "business records" (claim files, contacts, financial records, etc). As such, you are not required to preserve them as a matter of your normal business process. They are however, subject to discovery and as such you are required to preserve them if they are related to a legal issue (or I guess from thsi article, a potential legal issue).
This. Email is not a record, and not required to be maintained qua email, it is a medium, and may contain record material. Generally though this is not the case. Liability is one of the reasons you don't want to keep emails around forever, but really an email can just as easily save you as damn you. The real reason for not keeping emails (or any other non-record information) permanently is the cost of discovery. You have to sweep everything reasonably accessible than start to filter down as counsel defines the scope of the preservation (under cfr rule 26), and the bulk of that stuff is going to have to be reviewed by lawyers for relevance at a fat hourly rate.
What you do keep as a record is governed by both regulation and law, business need, and the amount of risk you are willing to assume. Section 802 pertains to records related to SEC filings and other financial reporting, not to all email. Two weeks is a short but not uncommon retention period for email in third part email management tools; I see typically 3 weeks to a month for the inbox, longer when moved into another folder, and then actual records get declared against content types governed by the company retention schedule.
Honestly, most large companies have legal preservation practices that are largely inadequate to their size and needs. It is more the norm that a preservation causes sturm and drang rather than the execution of well defined processes.
Prior to a lawsuit yes. But once that comes into play everything is to be kept
And I hope the juror is aware of such lies.
I wish the name of the writer would appear in the title of the news.
I tend to read the thing, wonder why it's so ridiculously slanted, and then notice it's from DED.
Short description:
"Bad Samsung wanna use same tactics as good Apple. Samsung is wrong anyway, why even try them? Kill them all! Oh, and let's use latin to end this argument as a pro. Who cares about balance anyway?"
Nyuh. I hope I'm not the only one who thinks more analyses and less DED-slander would serve Ai well?
Always thought that it just related to financial disclosure and not, as you seem to suggest, to claims between companies over a patent.