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

Gear

Groklaw Gear

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


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


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
Lost in Translation | 483 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
EU confirms their belief that Samsung was naughty
Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Friday, December 21 2012 @ 05:57 PM EST
Agreed. Very similar to the FTC Google investigation.

Note the FTC has postponed any decision until next year.


---

You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Lost in Translation
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, December 22 2012 @ 02:37 PM EST
There was a post about this under the last story. I tried to dig out what was going on, and it seems that it comes from an off topic question from the floor at about 35 minutes in this EC Press Conference which was principally what to do with the Spanish banking sector. Reuters picked it up and ran it as a story. Reuters used to be the Gold Standard in international press reportage, but since the internet their quality seem to have slipped. There was enough open-endedness and other background material there for the US tech press to run amok. The investigation has been going on, depending which papers you read since November 2011 , or February 2012 . Now Samsung has been invited to state its case . That this invitation is in formal EU-speak described as a statement of objections has apparently confused some of those on the litigation-happy west Atlantic shore. AFAICT (and someone with more technical knowledge please explain) the proceedings thus far are like a complaint to the ITC in the US. We are at the stage where the defendant, Samsung, has been asked to file its brief. There will probably be no public hearings. Sanctions or penalties may or may not be held against the defendant. This may be a simple request for behaviour modification. Perhaps we have been too enured to the non-compliance of one particular defendant, we know expect all multinationals to behave like spoiled brats. It doesn't have to be so.

[ 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 )