Judge Suggests Apple Is 'Smoking Crack' With Its Witness List In Samsung Dispute
from the benchslap dept
While Judge Lucy Koh has been so far favorable to Apple in the Samsung/Apple patent dispute, she clearly got fed up today when Apple tried to add a ton of witnesses at the last minute, telling the company's lawyer that he was wasting the court's time in no uncertain terms:"I am not going to be running around trying to get 75 pages of briefing for people who are not going to be testifying," U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh told Apple's lawyer Bill Lee.She went further too, warning of possible sanctions:
"I mean come on. 75 pages! 75 pages! You want me to do an order on 75 pages, (and) unless you're smoking crack, you know these witnesses aren't going to be called when you have less than four hours," Koh said.
"If it turns out I went through 75 pages for people who are not going to be called, I am going to think of a proper tax for that," Koh warned.As with many of these big company vs. big company patent disputes, it seems that so much of the focus is just wearing each other down with paperwork. At least in this case, the judge isn't going to allow it.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: lucy koh, paperwork, patents, smoking crack, witness list
Companies: apple, samsung
Reader Comments
The First Word
“You can get Hollywood writers to come up with this stuff.
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
You can get Hollywood writers to come up with this stuff.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Crackheads!?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The judge isn't going to allow either party to wear her down with paperwork. They are free to wear each other down as much as they like.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
I'm glad to see im not the only one whois actually thinking on these lines.
And AC, you are absolutely right. Rectangled aren't the case at all.
To Apple's credit, they took literally years to develope the actual design of the original iPhone (Model Number A1203). They did hard R&D in the span of 7 years or more only to have Samsung carbon copy of a prototype from 2006.
It takes years to develope and design and tweak something to a suitable ergonomic shape to hold in the palm of your hand, not a sudden change in a little over a month.
People seem to forget that Samsung had originally been liscensed and contracted to manufacture the A1203 iPhone and its prototypes. Hell the original iPhone's processor was a Samsung SL58900 (not a phone, a processor).
So maybe I'm a bit crazy, but I think it's a bit more than "rectangles".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/microsoft-patents-ones-zeroes,599/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Crackheads!?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
From what we know from reading articles about the trial:
Apple does a lot of consumer research first to see what people want in a phone. Variables include (but are by no means limited to) ergonomics, features, ease of access (lets face it, I hated those tiny buttons on the smart phones of 2007), how they want to make their calls and how they want to interact with people.
How I see the design came into play:
They tweaked the so called "rectangle patent" around what consumers wanted and found that their specific dimensions to suit the needs of those they surveyed.
I respect your comment. I just know from experience that design patents are not limited to the laws of basic Euclidean (finally spelled correctly) Geometry.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Now even if we are talking function there is nothing that is novel or not obvious or not already being worked towards by any number of other people. For example phones have always come with rounded corners, hell even a phone called the "Razor" had rounded corners. This is because phones go in peoples pockets and sharp pointy edges are not fun in there.
Now talking of pockets, they are only so big, in a world of wide screen content the only way to produce a device that sit's in a pocket and has as big a screen as possible for best viewing is a rectangle.
Given the tech and the market phones would have ended up looking like this with or with out Apple. They clearly opened up the door first but every one else was already reaching for the handle. Patents are not meant to be granted for that kind of advance, the benefit of being first with the obvious next step is being the first to market.
http://arstechnica.com/apple/2012/08/users-choose-androids-over-iphones-due-to-larger-scr eens-android-market/
Talking of consumer testing here some interesting inhouse stuff from Apple regarding why people where swaping to android. Seems "but I thought it was an iphone" is not one of them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
New cereal
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: New cereal
I started out with beerios in high school and that led me to crack-ka-jacks. Killogs is for the lames
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
http://phonewebz.com/samsung-galaxy-launch-russia.htm/samsung-galaxy-s-plus
One thing I would like to point out (and I'm sure you may be able to agree with me) is that both sides have been really really silly about all of this. Apple refuses to say "Live and let live" and Samsung argues "Apple is using our component patents". Funny thing is, Samsung liscensed their patents to Apple to create the iPhone and Apple had Samsung build their 2007 iPhone prototype in 2006. So we have them both destroying a good healthy relationship they once had. Either way they both are being dumb about it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
http://www.slashgear.com/sloppy-slates-not-ipad-envy-fueled-samsung-refund-rush-07241998/
Apple got it wrong by showing their ego in saying "iPhone envy". Samsung got their figures cooking the books.
http://www.slashgear.com/sloppy-slates-not-ipad-envy-fueled-samsung-refund-rush-07241998/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Oh, I am with you 100% on this! This ridiculous all around.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
It is a lot more readable when you group similar thoughts together, and use different paragraphs to separate different ideas. If you have a lot to say, separate it out so you make shorter points per paragraph :-)
No worries you're cool and you have a right to your opinions. The way you wrote may be one of the best ways to argue in text though. Makes it hard to read.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]