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.
when you start to post more articles about the competition, it only shows how scared you are of them. If you go to any android sites they don't even post about apple anymore, but here on AI everyday there's an android or samsung article how things have changed :smokey:
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?
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?
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?
when you start to post more articles about the competition, it only shows how scared you are of them. If you go to any android sites they don't even post about apple anymore, but here on AI everyday there's an android or samsung article
how things have changed
AI needs click bait. Plus Apple's product cycle is once a year on average which in the mid cycle leads to no news...either for AI or for Android sites. Android has a new product announcement nearly every day so there's lots of devices to review/discuss. Especially now around MWC.
Obviously the big apple related comparison yesterday was regarding Samsung Wallet vs iOS Passbook and Samsung's dominant Android position opposite of Apple.
Maybe you picked a bad day to make your dumbassed statement?
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
Comments
Excellent analysis. Nothing to comment on here!
deleted
Never. They just love whine about how sociopaths will always win. Wimps!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
What an absolutely vile thing to say.
If you think that post was 'vile', then you need to stop taking criticism of Apple to heart so much...
how things have changed :smokey:
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?
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?
deleted
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?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hahaha
when you start to post more articles about the competition, it only shows how scared you are of them. If you go to any android sites they don't even post about apple anymore, but here on AI everyday there's an android or samsung article
how things have changed
AI needs click bait. Plus Apple's product cycle is once a year on average which in the mid cycle leads to no news...either for AI or for Android sites. Android has a new product announcement nearly every day so there's lots of devices to review/discuss. Especially now around MWC.
However from yesterday 2/27:
http://www.androidguys.com/2013/02/27/comparing-the-samsung-galaxy-note-8-to-the-ipad-mini/
http://www.androidguys.com/2013/02/27/samsung-takes-on-google-wallet-apple-passbook-with-samsung-wallet/
http://www.androidpolice.com/2013/02/27/samsung-shows-off-new-passbook-like-wallet-app-and-api-at-mwc/
http://phandroid.com/2013/02/27/android-ios-fragmentation/
http://androidcommunity.com/samsung-announces-wallet-app-for-android-20130227/
http://www.droid-life.com/2013/02/27/the-samsung-problem-opinion/
http://www.droid-life.com/2013/02/27/samsung-introduces-wallet-application/
http://androidandme.com/2013/02/uncategorized/samsung-wallet-brings-passbook-functionality-design-to-android/
http://androidandme.com/2013/02/news/googles-biggest-supporter-samsung-could-be-its-worst-enemy/
http://www.androidpit.com/google-samsung-motorola-x-phone-android
Obviously the big apple related comparison yesterday was regarding Samsung Wallet vs iOS Passbook and Samsung's dominant Android position opposite of Apple.
Maybe you picked a bad day to make your dumbassed statement?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
What an absolutely vile thing to say.
G-A-P.
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht
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!
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleh1234
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.
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.