Judge Koh overrules Samsung objection to patent video depicting Apple products

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 77
    hudson1hudson1 Posts: 800member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post





    Instructions with that video make it clear it's up to each court to decide if the video is appropriate to use in a specific case.



    It only makes sense they would say that as the judge always should have the final say as to what's appropriate and admissible.  OTOH, I don't think that implies there are situations where it's damaging to use the video.

  • Reply 42 of 77
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,176member
    hudson1 wrote: »

    It only makes sense they would say that as the judge always should have the final say as to what's appropriate and admissible.  OTOH, I don't think that implies there are situations where it's damaging to use the video.

    Then why should it be be a "judgement call" then? On the contrary I think the intent was to make it clear there might be instances where that particular video should not be used, and it's up to the presiding judge to determine that. In this case Judge Koh finds it appropriate. An Appeals Court may find she erred in that judgment.
  • Reply 43 of 77
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sflocal View Post



    So long as Samsung is profiting from copying Apple's IP, they will do absolutely everything and anything to drag this through the court system at a snail's pace.



    Shameful company. I absolutely, steadfastly refuse to directly give them any of my business.

    Apple moving to another supplier for its components can't come soon enough.

     

    Probably one of the silliest things I've ever read.  You call Samsung's business practices shameful, but as long as you have 2 degrees of separation you're okay with it?  Just fyi, indirectly giving Samsung business is the same as directly giving them business.

  • Reply 44 of 77
    hudson1hudson1 Posts: 800member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post





    Then why should it be be a "judgement call" then? On the contrary I think the intent was to make it clear there might be instances where that particular video should not be used, and it's up to the presiding judge to determine that. In this case Judge Koh finds it appropriate. An Appeals Court may find she erred in that judgment.



    The judgment call is there because the judge always has to have authority over evidence and proceedings.  How do you know the real reason for potentially not showing the video is because the judge may feel it's irrelevant to the trial?

     

    Regardless, the chances of a trial being successfully appealed over a video the Justice Dept. helped produce is essentially zero.

  • Reply 45 of 77
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,176member
    hudson1 wrote: »

    The judgment call is there because the judge always has to have authority over evidence and proceedings.  How do you know the real reason for potentially not showing the video is because the judge may feel it's irrelevant to the trial?

    Regardless, the chances of a trial being successfully appealed over a video the Justice Dept. helped produce is essentially zero.

    I'd disagree. In a few weeks we'll see if you are right.
  • Reply 46 of 77
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post





    I'd disagree. In a few weeks we'll see if you are right.



    Ummm ... no. No chance of appeal on this. Nada. Zip. None.

  • Reply 47 of 77
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,176member

    Ummm ... no. No chance of appeal on this. Nada. Zip. None.

    I'm guessing that there's no memory of Apple demanding that the Samsung logo on courtroom TV's be covered up so as not to prejudice Apple's case in the first trial? Apple made the same general argument then that Samsung made now, that it unfairly implies innovation in the court's view by one of the parties.

    But again we'll see in few weeks whether Florian Mueller is correct about it perhaps contributing to a retrial.
    http://www.fosspatents.com/2014/03/over-samsungs-objection-judge-allows.html
  • Reply 48 of 77
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,926member
    ...
    Whether Samsung infringed or not, there was still going to be a reason to buy an Android tablet or phone: cost. So if Samsung had not succeeded, Motorola or another Android vendor would have. Except that the other Android vendors did not so blatantly copy Apple devices, which means that Apple would not have had a legal tree to bark up and air their grievances against.
    ...

    Sammy is a thief. It didn't have any good design ideas of its own, so it attempted to steal the work of others.
  • Reply 49 of 77
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 18,015member
    My brother is an IP lawyer and former patent examiner. I sent him the video. He is probably laughing his a** off right about now. It's like the video in the movie "Dodgeball."
  • Reply 50 of 77
    I wonder why they even had to object, that was a stupid, stupid move on Samesung's part
  • Reply 51 of 77
    Judge Koh must be sick and tired of dealing with these two squabbling firms, yet ironically they each still do business with one another, I do not get it!
  • Reply 52 of 77
    aaronjaaronj Posts: 1,595member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Jjaro View Post



    Why are you guys all so down on Samsung? You must admit that they DO make AWESOME televisions, right?

     

    Well, I'll tell you this when it comes to Samsung: I have a Samsung HDTV and a Samsung Blu-Ray player.  I've been pretty happy with both, for the most part.  But it's time to replace my HDTV, as it's old, there are better models out there now, and it has a dead pixel (though to be fair, when sitting on the couch, you can't see it; I only notice it when I'm standing a few feet away).

     

    I will NOT be replacing it with another Samsung, though.  The days of them getting any of my money for any of their products are officially over.  Sure, I'll still have random Samsung components in a new iPhone or whatever.  That can't be helped.  But where I can help it, I will avoid them at all costs.

     

    Leaning toward either an LG or a Vizio right now.

  • Reply 53 of 77
    chris_cachris_ca Posts: 2,543member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Jjaro View Post



    You must admit that they DO make AWESOME televisions, right?

    Why must anyone admit this?

  • Reply 54 of 77
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    aaronj wrote: »
    Leaning toward either an LG or a Vizio right now.

    If you're going with 50" or better than I recommend you give a Panasonic plasma some consideration while they're still available. With a little research, and due diligence you'll learn that they win awards almost every year. All of plasma's early shortcomings have been rectified, and in many cases the only con is its power consumption compared to LCD/LED.
  • Reply 55 of 77
    aaronjaaronj Posts: 1,595member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post





    If you're going with 50" or better than I recommend you give a Panasonic plasma some consideration while there still available. With a little research, and due diligence you'll learn that they win awards almost every year. All of plasma's early shortcomings have been rectified, and in many cases the only con is its power consumption compared to LCD/LED.

     

    Thanks for the suggestion. :)

  • Reply 56 of 77
    hudson1hudson1 Posts: 800member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post





    If you're going with 50" or better than I recommend you give a Panasonic plasma some consideration while they're still available. With a little research, and due diligence you'll learn that they win awards almost every year. All of plasma's early shortcomings have been rectified, and in many cases the only con is its power consumption compared to LCD/LED.

    Another vote from me for a plasma.  Mine's actually a, gasp, Samsung, and it's wonderful.  I've never come across an LED/LCD television with as good a picture as the best Panasonic and Samsung plasmas.

  • Reply 57 of 77
    aaronjaaronj Posts: 1,595member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Hudson1 View Post

     

    Another vote from me for a plasma.  Mine's actually a, gasp, Samsung, and it's wonderful.  I've never come across an LED/LCD television with as good a picture as the best Panasonic and Samsung plasmas.


     

    The problem is that the Panasonic plasmas I am finding are either too big (60") or are too expensive, or they are just not being sold anymore. :(

  • Reply 58 of 77
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    aaronj wrote: »
    The problem is that the Panasonic plasmas I am finding are either too big (60") or are too expensive, or they are just not being sold anymore. :(

    I was afraid that the smaller or less expensive ones would no longer be available. Just goes to show you that better quality doesn’t always win.
  • Reply 59 of 77
    Well Mueller's ...writing an Android app that may be released on iOS as some point in the future.  I think he said once that it was a game, but I'm not sure.  He's always very vague when he mentions it at the end of blog posts.

    Many of the new media still publish his slanted, maybe paid opinions. Its business as usual for him, needs must, money talks as they say.
  • Reply 60 of 77
    clemynxclemynx Posts: 1,552member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by seanie248 View Post

     

    it includes many products from different inventors, where are all their competitors crying into their empty milk bottles??

     

    some confusion here about the video, its not made specifically for any Apple V Samsung trail, it is just a general info video, to be shown to jurors relating to ANY patent dispute.

     

    Now, that I have seen it though, I didn't realise that Apple invented the tractor and plough…. well, you learn something new everyday !!! 


     

    I know it wasn't made for this trial.  I wonder if there were Samsung products in the video too. If there weren't, I understand that it's not fair.

Sign In or Register to comment.