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
More on Adverse Inferences, and Fairness, or Lack Thereof, in Apple v. Samsung ~pj | 155 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
More on Adverse Inferences, and Fairness, or Lack Thereof, in Apple v. Samsung ~pj
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 23 2012 @ 09:17 AM EDT
Out of curiosity it appears that Apple may have been more in the wrong here than
Samsung, so why did Samsung not push for sanctions against Apple (before Apple
filed for sanctions against them), or stronger sanctions against Apple than they
were to have received?

Given that they seem willing to explore most avenues of defence/counter-attack
it seems a little odd. Would Samsung be able to ask for stronger sanctions
against Apple when whatever the verdict is, is appealed? Or use it to defend
against Apple arguing that sanctions/equal treatment was unfair (at appeal)?

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

More on Adverse Inferences, and Fairness, or Lack Thereof, in Apple v. Samsung ~pj
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 23 2012 @ 11:53 AM EDT
Skill's the best part of magic.

Apple seems to have taken at least eight months to destroy evidence and prepare
a barrage of motions before even filing suit so as to keep Samsung in the
defensive throughout the whole trial.

Poor Samsung didn't know what hit it.

[ 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 )