|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, September 28 2012 @ 02:10 AM EDT |
It went away when Samsung pointed it out (that they had actually been keeping
the potential evidence much before Apple did and as Apple was the plaintiff they
OUGHT to know when the litigation would be starting) and with agreement with
Judge Koh, but Apple originally got the sanction from the Magistrate.
The point is, why did Apple get it in the first place when they themselves were
more guilty of it?
They were clearly trying to show Samsung in bad light, but they themselves when
pointing the finger at Samsung had three and a thumb pointing back at themselves
which were accurate in that they guilty was greater and that they were worse.
IT would have probably been more interesting (and equitable) that Samsung had
forced a sanction against Apple, the Plaintiff, for exactly the same thing, but
for doing it worse: ie even as Plaintiff they did not start saving the data
until AFTER Samsung.
Even though the sanction went away, it is public record that they got it when
they were more guilty of it themselves. Which is why I cannot now trust Apple
fully in anything they say bad about anyone else: there is now a nagging voice
telling me that Apple have been doing whatever they charge the other party of
doing but on a larger scale!
It is clearly in the nature of Apple['s lawyers] to claim others are doing what
Apple are doing loudly so as to divert attention away from the fact that Apple
are doing it.
So for Apple to loudly claim that Samsung has been copying their products tells
me that it is highly probable (with near certainty) that Apple has been copying
others [product] in the first place, but to a much greater amount.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|