Hey Judge Koh, you're paid a lot of money to do your job. Shut up and do it and quit whining. Sure, we'd all like peace, but there comes a time where one has to stick to principle and make a statement that eventually benefits all.
Otherwise, Scamscum and other degenerates will know they can piggyback off the work of others with little or no repercussions.
Jeez, it irks the hell out of me when the legal system would rather people exchange money and not resolve the injustice that happened.
Awfully touchy. Settlements are common. Juries tend to do surprising things sometimes. There seem to be a lot of emotions in that courtroom and I think she is reminding everyone that one or both sides might find themselves wishing they had settled if this goes to the jury. Everyone assumes only Samsung would benefit from the settlement. All the blogs, tweets, and opinions in the world don't mean squat. All that matters is what those people on the jury believe. We only know who wins when it is over and the verdict is read.
Based on the amount of conviction I see on this forum, it was probably wise for her to remind them that sometimes juries surprise you. If Apple does win and wins big, Samsung may wish it would have settled. If Apple wins but not as big as it expected, there's a chance they turned down a better agreement to go to trial.
I think Samsung is in the wrong, but that doesn't mean I'm not a little nervous the jury might not see things my way.
Hey Judge Koh, you're paid a lot of money to do your job. Shut up and do it and quit whining. Sure, we'd all like peace, but there comes a time where one has to stick to principle and make a statement that eventually benefits all.
Otherwise, Scamscum and other degenerates will know they can piggyback off the work of others with little or no repercussions.
Jeez, it irks the hell out of me when the legal system would rather people exchange money and not resolve the injustice that happened.
You're relying too much on the articles here to provide context and adding your personal bias to that with the editorialized naming convention. These things tie up court systems for quite a long time, and a verdict does not necessarily resolve this. It's likely that appeals will be filed on whatever sticks at the end.
I'd like to see Apple win big in this case! Alas, no verdict is guaranteed! This joke was told to me by a lawyer:
"A Trial is not a mechanism for finding the Truth! A Trial is a Method of finding which side has better lawyers!"
If either side in this case is not happy with the verdict, what's the next stop on the Appeal Path? US Supreme Court?
Until the Appeals are finished, do the sides have to pay each other for the patents etc?
It amazes me that Apple, with all its billions of Cash, couldn't muscle Samsung to do the right thing! I recall hearing about the owner of Foxconn being very Anti-Samsong, so between Foxconn and others, Apple should have been able to Replace Samsong as the Supplier! Of course The Elephant In This Room is Google, cause Samsung runs on Android OS made by Google!!!
The US Carriers, and Possibly Carriers around the World, probably would prefer NOT to have a Clear Winner in Apple or Google, never mind Samsung, which is just one of the phone maker… The Carriers would probably love to see a Divide And Conquer outcomes in all such cases, so that they can continue playing one OS against the other: iOS, Android, Windows Mobile, even Blackberry and some other OS around the corner! I vaguely recall hearing about FireFox working on Mobile OS?)!!! Maybe someone will do something with WebOS, the former Palm OS???
Jury Integrity is a concern too. Someone might try to sway the Verdict and then buy AAPL or Samsung Stock based on their prior knowledge of what the Verdict would be!!! Yes, that might sound like a Conspiracy Theory, and I am not a fan of those, but that thought did cross my mind!!!!
I am keeping my fingers crossed for a Just Verdict in Apple's Favor!!! Go Apple!!! ?????
I'm posting this here, too, because it's equally relevant to this side.
This ticks me off so much. So frigging much.
Does anyone else see the big picture here?
Steve Jobs has been stolen from by two entities.
The first stole out of alleged desperation. A lone figure in a sea of nearly 7 billion. A man who, with more intelligence, could have easily slipped quietly into the night, never to be heard from again. A man who, when caught and notified of the magnitude of his crime, felt alleged remorse and desired to write a personal apology to the people from whom he stole, meaning them no disrespect personally. I know I said elsewhere that if he took the wallet, he'd know who he'd stolen from, but if he hadn't opened the wallet in the dark, he wouldn't have known. This man is certain to be punished for his crime, swiftly and severely, even if his remorse truly is genuine.
The second stole out of greed, laziness, and apathy. A large presence in a small room. A company who, with more intelligence, could have easily avoided this entire debacle, becoming a second bastion of innovation in an industry with only one oasis in the desert. A company who, when caught and notified of the magnitude of its crime, claimed that they were the ones being stolen from, not the other way around. This company has a very real chance of getting away with their crime scot-free, and they don't feel an ounce of remorse, faked or otherwise.
I think the Judge Koh sees that Apple will loose as Sammy started pouring out evidences, that's why she suggested a peace talk. Or she may have been consulted by Apple for it? Not sure, maybe she has done that for the benefit of her country, USA.
Rock meet hard place, Lucy Koh should accept THAT IT IS HER JOB to come between this deadlocked position, the job SHE IS PAID TO DO.
I don't see how on earth she isn't doing her job. She's just giving both sides the opportunity to settle this in a way that may end up with a fairer result. The truth is, juries can be inconsistent, especially in cases like this.
Ultimately, whichever way this goes, I think Apple will be better off once it's over and done with. Having worked for a company that got involved in prosecuting a patent infringement, I know how much of the senior executives and senior engineers time was taken up preparing for their day in court.
While I think it will be grossly unfair if Samsung have been stealing ideas from Apple and they get away with it (and vice versa for that matter, I love Apple stuff, but I'm not pro-Apple enough to think that the biggest corporation in the world isn't capable of doing some dodgy things themselves), at the same time, I think Apple will be better off having their engineers and executives focussing on innovating again.
I don't see how on earth she isn't doing her job. She's just giving both sides the opportunity to settle this in a way that may end up with a fairer result. The truth is, juries can be inconsistent, especially in cases like this.
Ultimately, whichever way this goes, I think Apple will be better off once it's over and done with. Having worked for a company that got involved in prosecuting a patent infringement, I know how much of the senior executives and senior engineers time was taken up preparing for their day in court.
While I think it will be grossly unfair if Samsung have been stealing ideas from Apple and they get away with it (and vice versa for that matter, I love Apple stuff, but I'm not pro-Apple enough to think that the biggest corporation in the world isn't capable of doing some dodgy things themselves), at the same time, I think Apple will be better off having their engineers and executives focussing on innovating again.
Is this the third or fourth time she has unsuccessfully tried this?
It is pretty clear at this stage that neither side will budge from their immutable positions.
Is this the third or fourth time she has unsuccessfully tried this?
It is pretty clear at this stage that neither side will budge from their immutable positions.
Time to buckle down and keep going.
But that's clearly happening. She hasn't said it won't goto the jury if they don't speak to each other again, she's just nudged them to consider it again. It costs neither side nothing to at least think about it.
Judge Koh, from what I've read, seems to have handled a difficult case pretty well to me. Ultimately her job is to ensure a fair outcome to the case - if she thinks there is a greater chance of that happening by trying to get the parties talking again, good on her.
Awfully touchy. Settlements are common. Juries tend to do surprising things sometimes. There seem to be a lot of emotions in that courtroom and I think she is reminding everyone that one or both sides might find themselves wishing they had settled if this goes to the jury. Everyone assumes only Samsung would benefit from the settlement. All the blogs, tweets, and opinions in the world don't mean squat. All that matters is what those people on the jury believe. We only know who wins when it is over and the verdict is read.
Based on the amount of conviction I see on this forum, it was probably wise for her to remind them that sometimes juries surprise you. If Apple does win and wins big, Samsung may wish it would have settled. If Apple wins but not as big as it expected, there's a chance they turned down a better agreement to go to trial.
I think Samsung is in the wrong, but that doesn't mean I'm not a little nervous the jury might not see things my way.
I have trouble figuring out how to get Samsung to stop copying since that's all they to know how to do and they blatantly deny doing it.
Judge Koh has been labelled an Apple shill in regards to this court case, and at times I have agreed with that. To be honest, I think her asking for peaceful talks, is primarily because she thinks Appel are gunna have their asses handed to them by a jury verdict, therefore, to protect her Apple chums, she's now dragging up the peaceful settlement question.
Apple came to this case with all the cheerleading from Apple fans around the world, and they put on an impressive show, at first. Then Samsung basically demolished Apple when they took to the stand by means of getting to the heart of the matter and saying some of these Apple patents should be invalidated. Quite right, too.
I think the Judge Koh sees that Apple will loose as Sammy started pouring out evidences, that's why she suggested a peace talk. Or she may have been consulted by Apple for it? Not sure, maybe she has done that for the benefit of her country, USA.
So far, I don't see it. I think the two of them should have been adults and resolved this thing without having to go public. At least MS and Apple have their agreement not to copy each other.
When Samsung first came out with their Apple wannabe products, the first thing that came to my mind was RIP OFF. I held one of their tablets in my hand and thought. "This thing is a cheap knockoff". NOPE. Not gonna buy it. Wouldn't be prudent in this juncture.
DId Apple have wind of Samsung's product? The first iPhone was in development 2 1/2 years prior to the first iPhone was announced is what Jobs mentioned at the MacWorld announcement date in Jan. 2007. But since Samsung is a supplier of PANELS FOR THE iPHONE, when did Apple give them specs for a new panel to use, so Apple probably discussions about THEIR product BEFORE Samsung started developing THEIR product. Is what I think. I think it would be important for Apple to find out what the first day they began discussions on obtaining components from Samsung. That may have been long before the Samsung designs. The first iPhone was released in Jan 2007, so Apple would have to have a LOT more than 6 months to develop and sell a product and Apple was going to Samsung for components. That's what I think.
But that's clearly happening. She hasn't said it won't goto the jury if they don't speak to each other again, she's just nudged them to consider it again. It costs neither side nothing to at least think about it.
Judge Koh, from what I've read, seems to have handled a difficult case pretty well to me. Ultimately her job is to ensure a fair outcome to the case - if she thinks there is a greater chance of that happening by trying to get the parties talking again, good on her.
She's also protecting her resume. If the verdict is appealed -- which it will be, regardless of which side wins -- and loses, that will impact her viability for future political positions or more senior judgeships.
These folks are way more political than you might imagine.
No matter what, Apple is moving its billions away from Samsung. This will not go well for Samsung. All manufacturing will not be done by them anymore. Other companies like LG and Panasonic will take Apple's business in no time!
Comments
Awfully touchy. Settlements are common. Juries tend to do surprising things sometimes. There seem to be a lot of emotions in that courtroom and I think she is reminding everyone that one or both sides might find themselves wishing they had settled if this goes to the jury. Everyone assumes only Samsung would benefit from the settlement. All the blogs, tweets, and opinions in the world don't mean squat. All that matters is what those people on the jury believe. We only know who wins when it is over and the verdict is read.
Based on the amount of conviction I see on this forum, it was probably wise for her to remind them that sometimes juries surprise you. If Apple does win and wins big, Samsung may wish it would have settled. If Apple wins but not as big as it expected, there's a chance they turned down a better agreement to go to trial.
I think Samsung is in the wrong, but that doesn't mean I'm not a little nervous the jury might not see things my way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal
Hey Judge Koh, you're paid a lot of money to do your job. Shut up and do it and quit whining. Sure, we'd all like peace, but there comes a time where one has to stick to principle and make a statement that eventually benefits all.
Otherwise, Scamscum and other degenerates will know they can piggyback off the work of others with little or no repercussions.
Jeez, it irks the hell out of me when the legal system would rather people exchange money and not resolve the injustice that happened.
You're relying too much on the articles here to provide context and adding your personal bias to that with the editorialized naming convention. These things tie up court systems for quite a long time, and a verdict does not necessarily resolve this. It's likely that appeals will be filed on whatever sticks at the end.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder
"Usual steaming pile, not worth unhiding"
What would you suggest as "background music" for your tripe?
Oh yeah Samsung have a patent on that and this
????????????
Apple:- "Stop copying our stuff".
Samsung:- "We aren't copying your stuff".
Rock meet hard place, Lucy Koh should accept THAT IT IS HER JOB to come between this deadlocked position, the job SHE IS PAID TO DO.
I'd like to see Apple win big in this case! Alas, no verdict is guaranteed! This joke was told to me by a lawyer:
"A Trial is not a mechanism for finding the Truth! A Trial is a Method of finding which side has better lawyers!"
If either side in this case is not happy with the verdict, what's the next stop on the Appeal Path? US Supreme Court?
Until the Appeals are finished, do the sides have to pay each other for the patents etc?
It amazes me that Apple, with all its billions of Cash, couldn't muscle Samsung to do the right thing! I recall hearing about the owner of Foxconn being very Anti-Samsong, so between Foxconn and others, Apple should have been able to Replace Samsong as the Supplier! Of course The Elephant In This Room is Google, cause Samsung runs on Android OS made by Google!!!
The US Carriers, and Possibly Carriers around the World, probably would prefer NOT to have a Clear Winner in Apple or Google, never mind Samsung, which is just one of the phone maker… The Carriers would probably love to see a Divide And Conquer outcomes in all such cases, so that they can continue playing one OS against the other: iOS, Android, Windows Mobile, even Blackberry and some other OS around the corner! I vaguely recall hearing about FireFox working on Mobile OS?)!!! Maybe someone will do something with WebOS, the former Palm OS???
Jury Integrity is a concern too. Someone might try to sway the Verdict and then buy AAPL or Samsung Stock based on their prior knowledge of what the Verdict would be!!! Yes, that might sound like a Conspiracy Theory, and I am not a fan of those, but that thought did cross my mind!!!!
I am keeping my fingers crossed for a Just Verdict in Apple's Favor!!! Go Apple!!! ?????
I'm posting this here, too, because it's equally relevant to this side.
This ticks me off so much. So frigging much.
Does anyone else see the big picture here?
Steve Jobs has been stolen from by two entities.
The first stole out of alleged desperation. A lone figure in a sea of nearly 7 billion. A man who, with more intelligence, could have easily slipped quietly into the night, never to be heard from again. A man who, when caught and notified of the magnitude of his crime, felt alleged remorse and desired to write a personal apology to the people from whom he stole, meaning them no disrespect personally. I know I said elsewhere that if he took the wallet, he'd know who he'd stolen from, but if he hadn't opened the wallet in the dark, he wouldn't have known. This man is certain to be punished for his crime, swiftly and severely, even if his remorse truly is genuine.
The second stole out of greed, laziness, and apathy. A large presence in a small room. A company who, with more intelligence, could have easily avoided this entire debacle, becoming a second bastion of innovation in an industry with only one oasis in the desert. A company who, when caught and notified of the magnitude of its crime, claimed that they were the ones being stolen from, not the other way around. This company has a very real chance of getting away with their crime scot-free, and they don't feel an ounce of remorse, faked or otherwise.
It makes me livid.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb
I think the Judge Koh sees that Apple will loose as Sammy started pouring out evidences, that's why she suggested a peace talk. Or she may have been consulted by Apple for it? Not sure, maybe she has done that for the benefit of her country, USA.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }Hmm, can't tell if troll or retarded...
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
Apple:- "Stop copying our stuff".
Samsung:- "We aren't copying your stuff".
Rock meet hard place, Lucy Koh should accept THAT IT IS HER JOB to come between this deadlocked position, the job SHE IS PAID TO DO.
I don't see how on earth she isn't doing her job. She's just giving both sides the opportunity to settle this in a way that may end up with a fairer result. The truth is, juries can be inconsistent, especially in cases like this.
Ultimately, whichever way this goes, I think Apple will be better off once it's over and done with. Having worked for a company that got involved in prosecuting a patent infringement, I know how much of the senior executives and senior engineers time was taken up preparing for their day in court.
While I think it will be grossly unfair if Samsung have been stealing ideas from Apple and they get away with it (and vice versa for that matter, I love Apple stuff, but I'm not pro-Apple enough to think that the biggest corporation in the world isn't capable of doing some dodgy things themselves), at the same time, I think Apple will be better off having their engineers and executives focussing on innovating again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson
I don't see how on earth she isn't doing her job. She's just giving both sides the opportunity to settle this in a way that may end up with a fairer result. The truth is, juries can be inconsistent, especially in cases like this.
Ultimately, whichever way this goes, I think Apple will be better off once it's over and done with. Having worked for a company that got involved in prosecuting a patent infringement, I know how much of the senior executives and senior engineers time was taken up preparing for their day in court.
While I think it will be grossly unfair if Samsung have been stealing ideas from Apple and they get away with it (and vice versa for that matter, I love Apple stuff, but I'm not pro-Apple enough to think that the biggest corporation in the world isn't capable of doing some dodgy things themselves), at the same time, I think Apple will be better off having their engineers and executives focussing on innovating again.
Is this the third or fourth time she has unsuccessfully tried this?
It is pretty clear at this stage that neither side will budge from their immutable positions.
Time to buckle down and keep going.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
Is this the third or fourth time she has unsuccessfully tried this?
It is pretty clear at this stage that neither side will budge from their immutable positions.
Time to buckle down and keep going.
But that's clearly happening. She hasn't said it won't goto the jury if they don't speak to each other again, she's just nudged them to consider it again. It costs neither side nothing to at least think about it.
Judge Koh, from what I've read, seems to have handled a difficult case pretty well to me. Ultimately her job is to ensure a fair outcome to the case - if she thinks there is a greater chance of that happening by trying to get the parties talking again, good on her.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rednival
Awfully touchy. Settlements are common. Juries tend to do surprising things sometimes. There seem to be a lot of emotions in that courtroom and I think she is reminding everyone that one or both sides might find themselves wishing they had settled if this goes to the jury. Everyone assumes only Samsung would benefit from the settlement. All the blogs, tweets, and opinions in the world don't mean squat. All that matters is what those people on the jury believe. We only know who wins when it is over and the verdict is read.
Based on the amount of conviction I see on this forum, it was probably wise for her to remind them that sometimes juries surprise you. If Apple does win and wins big, Samsung may wish it would have settled. If Apple wins but not as big as it expected, there's a chance they turned down a better agreement to go to trial.
I think Samsung is in the wrong, but that doesn't mean I'm not a little nervous the jury might not see things my way.
I have trouble figuring out how to get Samsung to stop copying since that's all they to know how to do and they blatantly deny doing it.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }Judge Koh has been labelled an Apple shill in regards to this court case, and at times I have agreed with that. To be honest, I think her asking for peaceful talks, is primarily because she thinks Appel are gunna have their asses handed to them by a jury verdict, therefore, to protect her Apple chums, she's now dragging up the peaceful settlement question.
Apple came to this case with all the cheerleading from Apple fans around the world, and they put on an impressive show, at first. Then Samsung basically demolished Apple when they took to the stand by means of getting to the heart of the matter and saying some of these Apple patents should be invalidated. Quite right, too.
Samsung didn't copy Apple.
Judge Says NO To Testimony From Samsung Designer
http://galaxystocks.com/24615/business-news/judge-says-no-to-testimony-from-samsung-designer-aapl/
Judge bars Samsung designer from testifying in Apple trial
Read more: http://www.itproportal.com/2012/08/13/judge-bars-samsung-designer-from-testifying-in-apple-trial/#ixzz23SuNRUQM
Key Samsung designer barred from testifying in Apple case
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57491835-37/key-samsung-designer-barred-from-testifying-in-apple-case/
Honestly, it probably is already over, because from day one, the judge decided to bar any evidence that might work against Apple.?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
It makes me livid.
Dude, there's more important things in life to be livid about than two mega-rich corporations squabbling.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hjb
I think the Judge Koh sees that Apple will loose as Sammy started pouring out evidences, that's why she suggested a peace talk. Or she may have been consulted by Apple for it? Not sure, maybe she has done that for the benefit of her country, USA.
So far, I don't see it. I think the two of them should have been adults and resolved this thing without having to go public. At least MS and Apple have their agreement not to copy each other.
When Samsung first came out with their Apple wannabe products, the first thing that came to my mind was RIP OFF. I held one of their tablets in my hand and thought. "This thing is a cheap knockoff". NOPE. Not gonna buy it. Wouldn't be prudent in this juncture.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL
Dude, there's more important things in life to be livid about than two mega-rich corporations squabbling.
You just questioned Tallest Ski - how many minutes will it take for him to retaliate in a particularly childish way......?
From history I'll guess it will be along the lines of, "you can be livid about more than one thing".
DId Apple have wind of Samsung's product? The first iPhone was in development 2 1/2 years prior to the first iPhone was announced is what Jobs mentioned at the MacWorld announcement date in Jan. 2007. But since Samsung is a supplier of PANELS FOR THE iPHONE, when did Apple give them specs for a new panel to use, so Apple probably discussions about THEIR product BEFORE Samsung started developing THEIR product. Is what I think. I think it would be important for Apple to find out what the first day they began discussions on obtaining components from Samsung. That may have been long before the Samsung designs. The first iPhone was released in Jan 2007, so Apple would have to have a LOT more than 6 months to develop and sell a product and Apple was going to Samsung for components. That's what I think.
She's also protecting her resume. If the verdict is appealed -- which it will be, regardless of which side wins -- and loses, that will impact her viability for future political positions or more senior judgeships.
These folks are way more political than you might imagine.
No matter what, Apple is moving its billions away from Samsung. This will not go well for Samsung. All manufacturing will not be done by them anymore. Other companies like LG and Panasonic will take Apple's business in no time!