decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
new blood is good in any case though | 311 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
new blood is good in any case though
Authored by: designerfx on Monday, August 06 2012 @ 01:23 PM EDT
Seeing a new judge, who has the "I want this stuff out in the
open" aspects to begin with - even if she isn't aware of a
potential bias or concern of one, is at least a judge that's
starting things on a better foot than previous judges.

We can't just have all these judges of whom a majority don't
understand technology and are having the wool pulled over
their eyes or taking a very long time to catch up to speed
presiding over technology cases all the time. At least not
with the current situation we have, in my opinion.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Samsung's lawyers
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, August 06 2012 @ 01:25 PM EDT
I fail to see where the judge has any room to pontificate about Samsung
releasing anything to the press, unless the information was sealed by the court.
I'm no expert on logic, but if Samsung tried to introduce material into trial
evidence and the judge disallowed it, it is not evidence of any sort. What says
a party can't give that information to the public then? Apple has been beating
Samsung up in the press with releases, interviews and press conferences, so
what's the problem with Samsung defending itself in the press?
I'm also not a lawyer, but I've sat in on many a trial where the attorneys
stated that nothing a lawyer says in the trial is evidence unless the judge has
placed it into evidence, nothing a witness says is evidence unless the judge
places the statements into evidence and that none of the theatrics in the
courtroom is evidence. Maybe that is wrong and maybe it is right, or maybe
somewhere in between, but I still don't see where, unless a gag order has been
issued, a judge has any say so about how a party defends themselves in the
press.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Samsung's lawyers
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, August 06 2012 @ 01:58 PM EDT
All companies a alike before the law, but some companies are more alike then
others.
Do I hear an echo of Animal Farm.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Samsung's lawyers
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 07 2012 @ 03:07 AM EDT
Sure, and Judge Koh certainly seems like she's being quite the hardass in these
procedural rulings. But would she have the opportunity to do this if Samsung's
team had brought the defences up earlier?

It's more than probable that I'm misunderstanding here, but it
<i>sounds</i> like: Samsung's lawyers were a little tardy putting in
the paperwork, so some evidence is out (as well as: they didn't ensure that the
evidence to support what their expert witnesses were going to say was in the
record). I would have thought that these were bases that should have been
covered, even if you would tend to hope for a bit more leniency.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )