So Apple ultimately won, but that woman judge denies Apple from even recovering attorney fees? It's not about the amount, sixteen million is mere pennies to Apple, it's about the principle, and the evil and criminal Samsung should be ordered to pay up, since they lost. Isn't that how court cases usually goes? The loser pays attorney fees.
Not in the U.S. While 'loser pays' sounds fair in principle, with our inclination toward litigation here it could be a disaster. Patent troll companies would now shift gears and form 'lawyer troll' companies. They get a team of the top lawyers and go around suing anything and everything.
Your dog gets loose and poops in their yard. They sue you. The judge rules you are at fault, and since this is such a trivial stupid thing your only punishment is that you have to go clean the poop up. However..... since 'loser pays' the legal fees, you also have to pay the legal fees of $618,381 that their legal team accrued. Case obviously exaggerated to show the point.
There are special circumstances where you could recoup legal fees, but they are usually so rigidly defined any one 'miss' precludes you from them.
Judge Koh is no better than that other puppet doing the book case. I wonder how much Koh is getting paid off to reverse all of these decisions that were originally in favor for Apple.
Thing is, Samsung has been a lot more successful after it stopped copying Apple...
“Stopped”.
Originally Posted by b9bot
I wonder how much Koh is getting paid off to reverse all of these decisions that were originally in favor for Apple.
I wonder what would happen if this is really happening and discovered to be true. Do all her court decisions become overturned and the cases reopened? DOES SHE AT LEAST GET DISBARRED AND THROWN IN JAIL?
<div class="quote-container" data-huddler-embed="/t/181921/judge-denies-apple-bid-to-recover-attorneys-fees-from-samsung-releases-2-6m-bond-related-to-galaxy-tab-10-1-ban#post_2582342" data-huddler-embed-placeholder="false"><span style="background-color:rgb(241, 241, 241); line-height:1.4em">Originally Posted by </span><strong style="background-color:rgb(241, 241, 241); font-style:normal; line-height:1.4em">hentaiboy</strong><span style="background-color:rgb(241, 241, 241); line-height:1.4em"> </span><a href="/t/181921/judge-denies-apple-bid-to-recover-attorneys-fees-from-samsung-releases-2-6m-bond-related-to-galaxy-tab-10-1-ban#post_2582342" style="background-color: rgb(241, 241, 241); line-height: 1.4em;"><img alt="View Post" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" /></a><div class="quote-block"><span style="line-height:1.4em">Thing is, Samsung has been a lot more successful after it </span><strong style="font-style:normal; line-height:1.4em">stopped </strong><span style="line-height:1.4em">copying Apple...</span></div></div><p> </p><p>“Stopped”.</p><p> </p><div class="quote-container" data-huddler-embed="/t/181921/judge-denies-apple-bid-to-recover-attorneys-fees-from-samsung-releases-2-6m-bond-related-to-galaxy-tab-10-1-ban/40#post_2582484" data-huddler-embed-placeholder="false"><span style="background-color:rgb(241, 241, 241); line-height:1.4em">Originally Posted by </span><strong style="background-color:rgb(241, 241, 241); font-style:normal; line-height:1.4em">b9bot</strong><span style="background-color:rgb(241, 241, 241); line-height:1.4em"> </span><a href="/t/181921/judge-denies-apple-bid-to-recover-attorneys-fees-from-samsung-releases-2-6m-bond-related-to-galaxy-tab-10-1-ban/40#post_2582484" style="background-color: rgb(241, 241, 241); line-height: 1.4em;"><img alt="View Post" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" /></a><div class="quote-block"><span style="line-height:1.4em">I wonder how much Koh is getting paid off to reverse all of these decisions that were originally in favor for Apple.</span></div></div><p> </p><p>I wonder what would happen if this is really happening <em>and</em> discovered to be true. Do all her court decisions become overturned and the cases reopened? DOES SHE AT <em>LEAST</em> GET DISBARRED AND THROWN IN JAIL?</p><p> </p><p>Any legal eagles want to chime in on precedent?</p>
I don't know about precedent but if that had happened (and I don't believe it did) then I'd assume all decisions would have to be vacated and reassessed.
I wonder what would happen if this is really happening and discovered to be true. Do all her court decisions become overturned and the cases reopened? DOES SHE AT LEAST GET DISBARRED AND THROWN IN JAIL?
Any legal eagles want to chime in on precedent?
I think you're better than to feed the legal trolling of others. Some of the troll comments mention the 2.6 million dollar bond, when that is technically being returned to Apple. I guess they're also illiterate. Click on it if you don't believe me. As for the second, I have no idea. Perhaps she thought it would otherwise be appealed, but it's important to note that the attorney fees here relate solely to the hours billed to trade dress portions of the case. Scroll to page 18 and you'll see a conclusion. Every case cited to in the body of the document is also referred to there. It mentions that this is left up to judicial discretion, yet it refers to decisions from other cases. You would have to review those as well to get a better idea of how she arrived at such a conclusion.
So Apple ultimately won, but that woman judge denies Apple from even recovering attorney fees? It's not about the amount, sixteen million is mere pennies to Apple, it's about the principle, and the evil and criminal Samsung should be ordered to pay up, since they lost. Isn't that how court cases usually goes? The loser pays attorney fees.
Not in the U.S. While 'loser pays' sounds fair in principle, with our inclination toward litigation here it could be a disaster. Patent troll companies would now shift gears and form 'lawyer troll' companies. They get a team of the top lawyers and go around suing anything and everything.
Your dog gets loose and poops in their yard. They sue you. The judge rules you are at fault, and since this is such a trivial stupid thing your only punishment is that you have to go clean the poop up. However..... since 'loser pays' the legal fees, you also have to pay the legal fees of $618,381 that their legal team accrued. Case obviously exaggerated to show the point.
There are special circumstances where you could recoup legal fees, but they are usually so rigidly defined any one 'miss' precludes you from them.
Wow! This judge is deaf , blind and dumb beyond belief! The only thing left in copying would have been if they put an Apple logo on it!
On which matter? They received their bond back, and nothing in that document suggests that she disagrees with you on that point. I really think you guys accept AI articles and rush to comment too often. Look at the articles on any case involving Apple, and people on here will claim that every one of those judges has a gavel to grind with Apple.
Whether that wording was intention or not it doesn't matter. If intentional it's overt racism. If accidental it shows underlying issue in this country (or perhaps humanity).
I personally like the word looting for that circumstances as one isn't paying for the items and likely doesn't have permission but the situation is unique. However that term only has a negative connotation with stealing so I wouldn't use it to describe anyone going into a deserted store in a town destroyed by a hurricane in an attempt to survive.
The word finding is wrong on all accounts. Finding only works when you discover by chance or unexpectedly. Perhaps the word obtain would work better as it only states you have it and makes no subjective claim in and of itself as to the legally of the acquisition.
Comments
Lemme check to see if Oreo and Hydrox have similar icons, screens, and cables.
Well, duh.
Of course I had.
So Apple ultimately won, but that woman judge denies Apple from even recovering attorney fees? It's not about the amount, sixteen million is mere pennies to Apple, it's about the principle, and the evil and criminal Samsung should be ordered to pay up, since they lost. Isn't that how court cases usually goes? The loser pays attorney fees.
Not in the U.S. While 'loser pays' sounds fair in principle, with our inclination toward litigation here it could be a disaster. Patent troll companies would now shift gears and form 'lawyer troll' companies. They get a team of the top lawyers and go around suing anything and everything.
Your dog gets loose and poops in their yard. They sue you. The judge rules you are at fault, and since this is such a trivial stupid thing your only punishment is that you have to go clean the poop up. However..... since 'loser pays' the legal fees, you also have to pay the legal fees of $618,381 that their legal team accrued. Case obviously exaggerated to show the point.
There are special circumstances where you could recoup legal fees, but they are usually so rigidly defined any one 'miss' precludes you from them.
Judge Koh is no better than that other puppet doing the book case. I wonder how much Koh is getting paid off to reverse all of these decisions that were originally in favor for Apple.
“Stopped”.
I wonder what would happen if this is really happening and discovered to be true. Do all her court decisions become overturned and the cases reopened? DOES SHE AT LEAST GET DISBARRED AND THROWN IN JAIL?
Any legal eagles want to chime in on precedent?
Gotta love the Fandroid "talking points." It changes daily.
The problem is the only store I want to loot is the Apple Store.
OK this genuinely made me laugh.
+1
I wonder what would happen if this is really happening and discovered to be true. Do all her court decisions become overturned and the cases reopened? DOES SHE AT LEAST GET DISBARRED AND THROWN IN JAIL?
Any legal eagles want to chime in on precedent?
I think you're better than to feed the legal trolling of others. Some of the troll comments mention the 2.6 million dollar bond, when that is technically being returned to Apple. I guess they're also illiterate. Click on it if you don't believe me. As for the second, I have no idea. Perhaps she thought it would otherwise be appealed, but it's important to note that the attorney fees here relate solely to the hours billed to trade dress portions of the case. Scroll to page 18 and you'll see a conclusion. Every case cited to in the body of the document is also referred to there. It mentions that this is left up to judicial discretion, yet it refers to decisions from other cases. You would have to review those as well to get a better idea of how she arrived at such a conclusion.
So Apple ultimately won, but that woman judge denies Apple from even recovering attorney fees? It's not about the amount, sixteen million is mere pennies to Apple, it's about the principle, and the evil and criminal Samsung should be ordered to pay up, since they lost. Isn't that how court cases usually goes? The loser pays attorney fees.
Not in the U.S. While 'loser pays' sounds fair in principle, with our inclination toward litigation here it could be a disaster. Patent troll companies would now shift gears and form 'lawyer troll' companies. They get a team of the top lawyers and go around suing anything and everything.
Your dog gets loose and poops in their yard. They sue you. The judge rules you are at fault, and since this is such a trivial stupid thing your only punishment is that you have to go clean the poop up. However..... since 'loser pays' the legal fees, you also have to pay the legal fees of $618,381 that their legal team accrued. Case obviously exaggerated to show the point.
There are special circumstances where you could recoup legal fees, but they are usually so rigidly defined any one 'miss' precludes you from them.
So much wrong in your post.
The problem is the only store I want to loot is the Apple Store.
OK this genuinely made me laugh.
+1
There's nothing funny about looting stores. It's a vile, criminal act that should be condemned at every instant.
It's funny when Soli says it because he's joking.
Sounds like someone has looted your sense of humour. ????
If [@]SolipsismX[/@] is white he'll just be 'finding' Apple products.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/van-jones/black-people-loot-food-wh_b_6614.html
Wow! This judge is deaf , blind and dumb beyond belief! The only thing left in copying would have been if they put an Apple logo on it!
On which matter? They received their bond back, and nothing in that document suggests that she disagrees with you on that point. I really think you guys accept AI articles and rush to comment too often. Look at the articles on any case involving Apple, and people on here will claim that every one of those judges has a gavel to grind with Apple.
Whether that wording was intention or not it doesn't matter. If intentional it's overt racism. If accidental it shows underlying issue in this country (or perhaps humanity).
I personally like the word looting for that circumstances as one isn't paying for the items and likely doesn't have permission but the situation is unique. However that term only has a negative connotation with stealing so I wouldn't use it to describe anyone going into a deserted store in a town destroyed by a hurricane in an attempt to survive.
The word finding is wrong on all accounts. Finding only works when you discover by chance or unexpectedly. Perhaps the word obtain would work better as it only states you have it and makes no subjective claim in and of itself as to the legally of the acquisition.
Very interesting and rewarding. many thanks I love it
Yeah! Here is a smartphone and class. My wish is to own it