Do you really think so? Sir Robin was retired before he sat
as one of three
judges on the Appeal court (a common
occurrence when an expert is required).
They agreed with the
original Judge and gave reasoned arguments for affirming
the
"publicity order" which Apple then 'gamed'. It is when Apple
were hauled
back into court that the, FM-designated,
"extreme ruling for Samsung" was
issued which made them
comply with the original order and questioned what they
had
actually done, pointing out some factual errors. This is
purely a FM
managed
churnalism story - all he had was Sir Robin's
as one of
a number of names on a letter to the FTC. He
characterised this as being "hired
by Samsung" which turns
out to be false. Previous links will show the
rebuttal.
Perhaps he should be asked how he got hold of this
letter, dated
the previous day to the 'Secretary', with the
filing naming these experts? I
could not find this publicly
available on their website (but could be wrong).
However it
was obtained (deliberately leaked by mischief maker?) it was
clearly used for his own purposes, to
rehash misinformation about the Apple
case by smearing the
reputation of a distinguished ex-High Court Judge - he is
certainly
inaccurate in retelling that story. If you can see
a
conflict of interest (in a completely different case about
different aspects
of patents, so why involve Apple?)
in a
genuine expert providing
independent testimony, then that is possible. However, we
should probably wait
to see
what he says. If it conflicts with his previously
declared
opinions to favour Samsung then, and only
then, we should call him out
(especially if he goes back to
sit on related cases). However, if it supports
and backs
Samsung
because he is being consistent with previous thoughts and
strong opinions then that is why the law firm
have chosen him? Read up on him
using previous posts' bio
links and you'll see there is no conflict of interest
- he
provides expertise to various bodies already - the
whiff of bias and
money-tainted opinion is coming from
elsewhere! [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|