Samsung In Hot Water For Publicy Releasing Barred Evidence to Undercut Apple’s Design Claims - Polidicks

[QUOTE=AllThingsD]Denied the opportunity to make the argument in court that the design of the original iPhone was derived from Sony concepts, Samsung has decided to make it in the court of public opinion. Moments ago, the company released to the media two batches of evidence excluded from the trial currently occuring in San Jose, Calif., along with the following statement: "The Judge’s exclusion of evidence on independent creation meant that even though Apple was allowed to inaccurately argue to the jury that the F700 was an iPhone copy, Samsung was not allowed to tell the jury the full story and show the pre-iPhone design for that and other phones that were in development at Samsung in 2006, before the iPhone. The excluded evidence would have established beyond doubt that Samsung did not copy the iPhone design. Fundamental fairness requires that the jury decide the case based on all the evidence." Ahead of opening arguments on Monday, Samsung lawyer John Quinn asked the court to hear further arguments and allow evidence showing that Samsung designs for what became the P700 predate the iPhone. Judge Lucy Koh denied the request, saying that she had already heard three motions to reconsider the point. Quinn persisted, saying he was begging the court to hear more discussion, something he said he hadn’t done in his 30-plus years of law. “You’ve made your record for appeal,” Koh said. “Don’t make me sanction you, please.” Update: Apple’s legal team was quick to take issue with Samsung’s release of evidence excluded from the trial, saying the action was contemptible. Judge Koh was none too pleased with the move herself, calling for an immediate meeting with Quinn. “Tell Mr. Quinn I’d like to see him today,” Koh said. “I want to know who drafted the press release, who authorized it from the legal team.” AllThingsD’s Ina Fried contributed to this report.[/QUOTE] [url]http://allthingsd.com/20120731/samsung-goes-public-with-excluded-evidence-to-undercut-apples-design-claims/[/url] This is just getting ridiculous now.

Well that was a shitty move.

Chances are Samsung only agreed to the NDA to give Apple the middle finger by doing [b]exactly this[/b].

In all fairness having this excluded from the trial was complete bullshit in the first place. [editline]1st August 2012[/editline] Also the agreement was to not force each other to reveal secrets. They said nothing about releasing their own secrets.

Good to see the judge from Silicon Valley isn't acting bias in any way.

[QUOTE=goon165;37029181]In all fairness having this excluded from the trial was complete bullshit in the first place. [editline]1st August 2012[/editline] Also the agreement was to not force each other to reveal secrets. They said nothing about releasing their own secrets.[/QUOTE] The article doesn't really say why this evidence was excluded. So as easy as it is to say Samsung had every right to release this info we don't really know the whole story here. For all we know Apple could be holding back some evidence that would have put the finger on Samsung.

Whoever wins, we lose.

Judge Koh pretty much exclusively makes headway for Apple to do all the nonsense litigation it does, I wouldn't be surprised at all if she was receiving some sort of "incentive" from Apple. There's no reason to selectively choose evidence from one side as being unusable.

I wonder if Miss Koh is enjoying her solid platinum Lamborghini. Seriously, she is such an obvious Apple puppet.

But why wasn't it admissible in the first place?

[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;37033911]But why wasn't it admissible in the first place?[/QUOTE] It was submitted too late apparently.

[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;37033911]But why wasn't it admissible in the first place?[/QUOTE]Inconvenient for Apple.

[QUOTE=DamagePoint;37029253]The article doesn't really say why this evidence was excluded. So as easy as it is to say Samsung had every right to release this info we don't really know the whole story here. For all we know Apple could be holding back some evidence that would have put the finger on Samsung.[/QUOTE] It was excluded because samsung brought the evidence in, after the conclusion of the discovery process. Essentially one of the cornerstones of the legal process in front of a judge. Samsung basically fucked up royally with that. My guess is, they tried to keep it behind in order to not allow Apple lawyers to create a defense against. So the judge was completely in the right to stop the admissions. [QUOTE=mblunk;37029551]Judge Koh pretty much exclusively makes headway for Apple to do all the nonsense litigation it does, I wouldn't be surprised at all if she was receiving some sort of "incentive" from Apple. There's no reason to selectively choose evidence from one side as being unusable.[/QUOTE] No she didn't. Samsung fucked up by providing this evidence only after the end of the discovery process. Not admitting pre-existing evidence into the case, after the conclusion of the discovery process is completely standard. (essentially the evidence has to not exist during the discovery process to be admitted). This is basically akin to a state prosecutor holding the murder weapon as a damning evidence out of the case during disovery (while having it). Only to provide it in the middle of the process in order to influence the jury and not give ample time to the defense to prepare. Historically, samsung has had very little respect for the law, and it sort of went trough in Korea. But they're attempting similar practises elsewhere in the world and it's biting them into the ass. Hell korean courts are fed up with them as well already.