Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

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

Gear

Groklaw Gear

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

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:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

A more general point | 111 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

A more general point

Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 11:28 AM EDT

This is a good example of why many litigators, especially
defense lawyers, subscribe to a fight-over-every-little-
detail philosophy. Every once in a while your opponent gets
distracted, rushed, and sleep-deprived enough that they
completely forget to do something rather important.

Not that apple really cares about punitive damages. They
were lucky to get a favorable verdict, and they know it.
They also know this case will be appealed, and it will be
years before they get a dime from the judgement, if ever.
Still, having the judge triple the damages would have been
quite nice from a PR standpoint - and it should have been
almost automatic given that the jury found in Apple's favor
on almost all questions of fact.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Can't wait for da transcripts.

Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 11:29 AM EDT

As if this isn't bad enough we will really see the uglyness later on.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Hindsight - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, September 13 2012 @ 01:05 PM EDT

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 )