johndoe98
About
- Username
- johndoe98
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- -
- Roles
- member
- Badges
- 0
- Posts
- 278
Reactions
Comments
-
chris_ca wrote: » Obviously, you care enough to post a response (which he cannot see because he blocked you). I care enough to inform others I have no problem with them ignoring me if they have nothing to contribute, sure. Have anything else to…
-
sessamoid wrote: » Simple mistakes make by simpletons. You're blocked by me, too. As if I care.
-
eluard wrote: » Trying to pollute the jury by polluting public opinion around it — by presenting an entirely irrelevant picture and quotation and pretending that it and it alone makes their case, and that in not allowing it to be evidence Koh is t…
-
huntercr wrote: » Being found guilty of Jury tampering does not require that the Jury actually be swayed. It is the *attempt* to sway them that is illegal. Samsung is trying to get the Sony image into the Juror's heads... sowing the seeds of dou…
-
tallest skil wrote: » I thought he was referring to "pleading the fifth". No it was a simple mistake. Most people understood given the context that I meant to imply the free speech clause, as Quinn himself discussed in the declaration. For a …
-
brucepondo wrote: » You're the reason baby Jesus gave us block lists. Have fun attention-whore. Yes, please do ignore me for trying to have an intelligent conversation. Nothing like hiding dissent whenever it pops up.
-
quinney wrote: » Well for one thing, it is the First Amendment that deals with free speech, not the Fifth. That kind of deflates your credibility immediately. So I made a careless mistake, does that change the underlying argument? I guess all …
-
stniuk wrote: » Seems to me they are trying to pollute the jury. If this was a murder trial they would be in prison. Not possible unless the jury is already corrupt. Are you insinuating the jury is corrupt?
-
ericthehalfbee wrote: » Oh the irony. We don't know. Well, everyone except for you, who seems to know exactly what's going on. If this was a non-issue, Koh could have simply said "Mr. Quinn, in the future please refrain from making press releas…
-
freerange wrote: » Well aren't you the legal genius.... These unethical, immoral liars didn't just release the banned (and misleading) "evidence", they declared that it, and it alone, absolved them of any and all responsibility for stealing Apple'…
-
ericthehalfbee wrote: » And to all the "legal experts" who say they did nothing wrong, answer me this simple question: Why did Judge Koh get so upset over this happening? Surely she's the one who knows better than anyone what should and shouldn't …
-
macky the macky wrote: » Weasels Think Different. So there are these two lawyers talking and a pretty girl walks by. "Boy," said the first lawyer, I'd like to f**k her." The second lawyer responded, "Out of what?" LOL. Never heard it, but I …
-
gazoobee wrote: » nice try. :-) Where is my reasoning inaccurate? What facts are not veridical? I'm happy to be proven wrong and to change my perspective. But I'm not seeing much of an argument from many of you, and this response isn't much of …
-
SpamSandwich wrote: » This lawyer keeps forcing the issue. When the trial starts up again on Friday, I wonder if the judge will sanction him. I'd like to see this too. Given the lawyer's declaration, I fear it would raise First Amendment issues…
-
enjourni wrote: » This is a pretty obvious (and pathetic) attempt by Samsung to try to sidestep the court by appealing to the general public and starting a controversy, hoping the court will cave in to outside pressure. If the court ordered it …
-
gazoobee wrote: » You're exaggerating and confabulating a bit here. You say the judge "wanted all the trial information to be public" but that's not the case is it? The judge only said that she wanted the case to be tried in public. She did…
-
sflocal wrote: » Judge tells Samsung to exclude something, they make it public. Way to go Samsung. That will certainly make your case solid.. *rolls eyes* Did you even read the declaration? Quinn's point, repeated multiple times, was that the…
-
Good response. Yesterday I thought the release of the information quite questionable, today Quinn's declaration has convinced me it was entirely fair game.
-
just_a_guy wrote: » I think that this is an awesome update. I cannot wait to just plug my computer in and get emails and other updates. I'm confused as to why it isn't done when on battery though. Hmmm. Maybe they could update to do that sometime?…
-
solipsismx wrote: » Now you've done it. Just wait for the haters to claim that this is nothing new and that all other OSes would allow you to close the lid and still work in the background. Intel Smart Connect will likely work for most OSs no? …