Judge who forced Apple to publicly apologise now works for Samsung
33 replies, posted
[img]http://imgkk.com/i/ryyd.jpg[/img]
[url]http://www.techradar.com/news/mobile-computing/tablets/uk-judge-who-forced-apple-apology-now-legal-expert-for-samsung-1134575[/url]
[quote]How's this for irony: The U.K. judge who ruled Apple must publicly apologize to Samsung as part of a patent appeal is now an expert on the Korean manufacturer's legal team.
Foss Patents reported Thursday that Professor Sir Robin Jacob, a retired U.K. judge-turned-professor who famously forced a public apology out of Apple last year, now appears to be working for the very company he ruled in favor of.[/quote]
I see no problem with this.
That's not suspicious at all
Note that [B]now[/B] works for samsung. He wasn't working for samsung when he made the court verdict against apple.
[QUOTE=lemonskunk;39752051]I see no problem with this.[/QUOTE]
lol
if the judge made samsung apologize and ~mysteriously~ started working for apple, you would be losing your shit right now.
[QUOTE=legolover122;39752071]Note that [B]now[/B] works for samsung. He wasn't working for samsung when he made the court verdict against apple.[/QUOTE]
Probably because he wouldn't have gotten the case if he was?
Money money money
It looks bad for him yes, but samsung hiring an ex judge to help them with legal is a very smart move.
[QUOTE=A_Pigeon;39752165]It looks bad for him yes, but samsung hiring an ex judge to help them with legal is a very smart move.[/QUOTE]
Still mighty suspicious, but you're right.
Wouldn't be surprised if Apple comes in demanding a retrial or something.
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;39752312]Wouldn't be surprised if Apple comes in demanding a retrial or something.[/QUOTE]
Working for Samsung after trial doesnt mean it wasnt fair.
Ex-post facto here
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;39752312]Wouldn't be surprised if Apple comes in demanding a retrial or something.[/QUOTE]
I honestly couldn't blame them. The judge getting a cushy legal job from a major corporation after he sided in their favor is blatantly obvious that he was bribed with said job.
Considering he's had more combined knowledge of the case than any one person on either side, Samsung snagging him for their legal team was a great move. And with him on their legal team, he won't be giving any more verdicts regarding the future cases between S and A.
I see absolutely nothing wrong with this move, even if Apple had grabbed him instead.
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;39752415]I honestly couldn't blame them. The judge getting a cushy legal job from a major corporation after he sided in their favor is blatantly obvious that he was bribed with said job.[/QUOTE]
Or [I]maybe[/I] he ruled as he did because that was how he interpreted the law and [I]then[/I] got a job at Samsung. Hell, it's not like he wasn't at a good position to get it.
Not saying it isn't fishy. But I'd be more inclined to believe there's foul play involved if he was actively recruited by Samsung.
If this was apple it would be a clear case of them bribing/rewarding the judge with a job
seriously even if there's no foul play going on this isn't how you make court decisions look valid
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;39752085]lol
if the judge made samsung apologize and ~mysteriously~ started working for apple, you would be losing your shit right now.[/QUOTE]
it would be a giant FP conspiracy.
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;39752312]Wouldn't be surprised if Apple comes in demanding a retrial or something.[/QUOTE]
We demand an apology for making us apologize.
Don't really see how this is suspicious. Samsung thought he did a damn good job and wants him on their team to win future legal battles for them, so they offered him a new job with them post-trial for a fatter paycheck, what more?
If there was indications they offered him the job before he made his verdict then that'd definitely be foul play, but that isn't the case, or?
[QUOTE=legolover122;39752071]Note that [B]now[/B] works for samsung. He wasn't working for samsung when he made the court verdict against apple.[/QUOTE]
I wouldn't be surprised if Samsung offered him a job after the ruling.
[QUOTE=Greenen72;39752737]If this was apple it would be a clear case of them bribing/rewarding the judge with a job
seriously even if there's no foul play going on this isn't how you make court decisions look valid[/QUOTE]
can't argue this isn't going to look fishy and make a shitton of people scream about it, but seriously why [I]wouldn't[/I] samsung try and hire a legal mind who didn't just cave into letting an apple patent case strike again? Everybody bitches and moans about apple patent trolling being abusive, and the fact they get away with it all the time 'suspicious' of the system- yet somehow you're all flipping over and treating it like apple is the victim of a blatant under-the-table ruling because a judge who had already resigned from the position got a (perfectly legal) offer to work for a company that thought he'd actually be capable of helping them avoid more apple attacks in the future
[QUOTE=legolover122;39752071]Note that [B]now[/B] works for samsung. He wasn't working for samsung when he made the court verdict against apple.[/QUOTE]
yeah, it's not like he was offered a position under the table for his verdict
or anything
i mean im sure it's purely a coincidence that he ruled against apple and then got a job at samsung
pure coincidence
[QUOTE=Pat4ever;39753626]yeah, it's not like he was offered a position under the table for his verdict
or anything
i mean im sure it's purely a coincidence that he ruled against apple and then got a job at samsung
pure coincidence[/QUOTE]
It's not a coincidence at all. He's one of the most qualified people for this, Samsung took notice, and after he retired they offered him a job. Any other option is just silly for both Samsung and the judge.
[QUOTE=demoguy08;39752486]Or [I]maybe[/I] he ruled as he did because that was how he interpreted the law and [I]then[/I] got a job at Samsung. Hell, it's not like he wasn't at a good position to get it.
Not saying it isn't fishy. But I'd be more inclined to believe there's foul play involved if he was actively recruited by Samsung.[/QUOTE]
Not implying apple wasn't in the wrong with their patent trolling, and I hate to take the "corporations r all evil!!" stance, but I don't trust that shit for a second.
[QUOTE=legolover122;39752071]Note that [B]now[/B] works for samsung. He wasn't working for samsung when he made the court verdict against apple.[/QUOTE]
Well yeah that's generally how lobbying works.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;39753728]Well yeah that's generally how lobbying works.[/QUOTE]
It's frustrating that you'd have to fight fire with fire in such situations.
[QUOTE=DoctorSalt;39753697]It's not a coincidence at all. He's one of the most qualified people for this, Samsung took notice, and after he retired they offered him a job. Any other option is just silly for both Samsung and the judge.[/QUOTE]
yeah makes sense that he'd just drop being a judge and retire from his occupation
then suddenly get a job at Samsung
whatever you say though
[QUOTE=Pat4ever;39753863]yeah makes sense that he'd just drop being a judge and retire from his occupation
then suddenly get a job at Samsung
whatever you say though[/QUOTE]
Then suddenly get a job?
It was last fucking year, mate. One would assume that Samsung had been deliberating on putting him in their legal team, instead of going 'YEAH OKAY LET'S HIRE THIS GUY AND THROW WADS OF CASH AT HIM EVERY DAY TO WIPE HIS ASS WITH'
It's like watching two childs fighting in an unfair manner.
[QUOTE=Pat4ever;39753626]yeah, it's not like he was offered a position under the table for his verdict
or anything
i mean im sure it's purely a coincidence that he ruled against apple and then got a job at samsung
pure coincidence[/QUOTE]
Proof please, everything you are saying is complete hearsay.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.