Apple Vs. Samsung: Judge asks Apple's attorneys if they're 'smoking crack'

[garyopa]

PLUS: How Samsung explain they didn't copy the iPhone and iPad, with pictures, AND MORE!



The trial continues.
US District Judge Lucy Koh laid into lawyers, demanding to know how she could be expected to go through 75 pages of objections...

We've been informing you on how the giant Apple v. Samsung patent trial is going, and now its time for another update.

Now that testimony in the trial is entering its final hours, US District Judge Lucy Koh laid into Apple lawyers, after receiving a 75-page briefing. The document covered 22 potential rebuttal witnesses the company might want to call after Samsung finishes presenting its case.

Koh demanded to know how she could be expected to go through 75 pages of objections to witnesses that she doesn't believe will have time to testify in any case.

"You want me to do an order on 75 pages tonight? When, unless you're smoking crack, you know that these witnesses are not going to be called?" Koh shouted at Apple lawyers. "Who is going to call all these witnesses when you have less than four hours left?"

"Your honor, first of all, I'm not smoking crack," said Apple lawyer Bill Lee. "We have timed it out."

Apple lawyer Michael Jacobs also stepped forward, assuring her that they had done a time test, and could get through 20 witnesses today and tomorrow in its rebuttal case against Samsung. "We didn't mean to burden the court," he said.

"You filed 75 pages of objections!" said Koh. "What do you mean you didn't mean to burden the court?"

So, Koh promised Apple's lawyers that if they were overshooting the mark in their estimates, she would think of a penalty.

"If it turns out I will have gone through 75 pages of objections for people who are not realistically expected to be called, then I'm going to think up a proper tax for that," she said.

Well, in a related note, Samsung kinda turned tables on Apple, and demanded $400M for its own patents.

But even more striking was Samsung's counter-offensive, in which it argued that its own patents were violated by Apple. Samsung claims that Apple should pay $422 million for copying Samsung patented technology, while Apple is seeking $2.88 billion from Samsung.

Samsung claims Apple infringes upon three patents, namely #7,577,460, filed for in July 2006, covering a "portable composite communication terminal for transmitting/receiving and images, and operation method and communication system thereof." There's also #7,456,893, filed for in June 2005, which covers a "Method of controlling digital image processing apparatus for efficient reproduction and digital image processing apparatus using the method," and #7,698,711, filed for in July 2007, covering a "Multi-tasking apparatus and method in portable terminal."

And finally, here's how Samsung explained that it didn't copy the iPhone and iPad, in pictures.

Testifying on Samsung's behalf was one of the people behind LaunchTile, a user interface for mobile touchscreen devices in the early 2000s such as the HP iPaq. Samsung presented an image of LaunchTile running on the iPaq to show that interfaces consisting of a grid of rectangular icons weren't unique to Apple:



After finishing its third-party prior art argument, Samsung attempted to disprove Apple's point that Samsung products were dramatically altered to look just like the iPhone shortly after the iPhone's release. Whereas Apple cherry-picked pre- and post-iPhone devices to make Samsung look like a dirty thief, Samsung showed that it had iPhone-like designs even before the iPhone came out:

Samsung said Apple was the one that stole the iPhone:

Samsung was not allowed to show certain evidence that Apple was inspired by Sony when building the iPhone, because the evidence was submitted too late in the legal process. But Samsung still had a bit to show the jury, including this 2006 e-mail from one Apple executive to another referencing "Sony-style" design:

So, there you go. Testimony is scheduled to end this Friday, and this is what will be left:

Jury instructions will be discussed Monday, closing arguments are scheduled for Tuesday, and after that the jury will have a lot to mull over. Whichever side loses will probably appeal. You didn't think this was actually the end, did you?

NEWS SOURCE #1: Apple v Samsung Judge at wits end asks if lawyers are smoking crack (via) ArsTechnica
NEWS SOURCE #2: Samsungs argument that it didn't copy the iPhone and iPad in pictures (via) ArsTechnica

Our thanks to 'Gauss' for this news item!

[billybob2010]

starting to think apple will attack anybody, love the smoking crack bit

[Battlefield]

Hehe.. This judge is funny, and it means that Samsung cant lose againts these crack heads.

There was no case in the first place, but Apple was too dumb, blind and greedy to see that. I hope they must pay Samsung for the damages and waste of time in court.

[msanchez]

If I ever see this judge... I fear I'll have to kiss her, I don't think I could contain my raging gratitude LOL! And as far as sammy's evidence that apple are in fact the biggest rip off artist ever (stealing ideas from sony? OUCH!) all that can be said is WHOOP! Now if only the courts would order the obliteration of all iphones in existence I would be in my own personal nirvana.

[billysastard]

apple wont loose this, despite what the judge said she's still firmly in apples pocket, having tried cases involving them before, always with apple winning, even if they do lose they will appeal this from now until the sun runs out of fuel, running up bills for samsung.

[Battlefield]

But even more striking was Samsung's counter-offensive, in which it argued that its own patents were violated by Apple. Samsung claims that Apple should pay $422 million for copying Samsung patented technology.
-----------------------
This is maybe the best part.

Looking at those Samsung patents, Apple clearly uses them on Iphone "illegally". Other companies also do this, but Samsung will most likely only sue Apple because of the shitty rats they are.

Apple cant win any case thou...Time changes for everyone. Samsung is Apples biggest threat in the world, and its the main reason why they are suing in the first place.

[msanchez]

apple wont loose this, despite what the judge said she's still firmly in apples pocket, having tried cases involving them before, always with apple winning, even if they do lose they will appeal this from now until the sun runs out of fuel, running up bills for samsung.

Well it's not like samsung is link-sang that they can be sued into submission by the iholes. Realistically speaking though, I don't expect it to go all fine and good for samsung, but I don't see how the iholes can make an honest comeback... oh what am I saying? I'm expecting honesty from them? what's next? sony will denounce their nazi regime? I sadly have to share in your cynicism.

...
This is maybe the best part.

Looking at those Samsung patents, Apple clearly uses them on Iphone "illegally". Other companies also do this, but Samsung will most likely only sue Apple because of the shitty rats they are...

I wouldn't be too sure sammy won't go head hunting if they can, I would hope they don't though.

In any case, you read these patents and it's just incredible that these things are awarded to companies. Every patent that I've ever read is even more vague than the last.

[Battlefield]

Well it's not like samsung is link-sang that they can be sued into submission by the iholes. Realistically speaking though, I don't expect it to go all fine and good for samsung, but I don't see how the iholes can make an honest comeback... oh what am I saying? I'm expecting honesty from them? what's next? sony will denounce their nazi regime? I sadly have to share in your cynicism.



I wouldn't be too sure sammy won't go head hunting if they can, I would hope they don't though.

In any case, you read these patents and it's just incredible that these things are awarded to companies. Every patent that I've ever read is even more vague than the last.

The whole patent thingy is totally crap. It's only there to harm competition. At the same time, monopoly should be avoided...Its like the patents is there to create monopolism to a degree.

As for Samsung..If they wanted to be on a sueing spree, they would already have done that.
Last time, Apple went for Motorola.. which doesent sue others for no reason either.

Its easy to spot a serious company, and which companies which is ran by teenage brains.

[JonathanD]

The whole patent thingy is totally crap. It's only there to harm competition. At the same time, monopoly should be avoided...Its like the patents is there to create monopolism to a degree.

As for Samsung..If they wanted to be on a sueing spree, they would already have done that.
Last time, Apple went for Motorola.. which doesent sue others for no reason either.

Its easy to spot a serious company, and which companies which is ran by teenage brains.

The patent system was designed to be a limited monopoly, originally it was intended that you create or invent something like a new mouse trap, and you had exclusive rights to make it for X amount of years and no one could copy you. It was designed to reward people for creating something new and help spur innovation.

The problem is that the system was designed for hardware like mouse traps or steam engines or farm equipment. Not software or computer tech where a patent lasting 20 years is retarded. They need to update the system to give much much shorter patents for software a couple of years would be plenty, electronics hardware maybe 5 years.

That and the patent system these days also gives patents for like you say stuff so vague it could mean almost anything.