Samsung: we went public with excluded exhibits because you asked for it

By , Aug 1, 2012

As we reported yesterday, Samsung has gotten itself in some hot water with Judge Lucy Koh who strongly condemned its attorneys’ decision to influence the jurors by publicizing previously excluded evidence. Samsung was hoping to sway the court of public opinion by releasing a set of slides and a media release which it hoped to use in the litigation to establish that Apple sough inspiration for the iPhone’s design from Sony, as its product chief suggested in a pre-trial interview.

The Judge demanded that Samsung’s legal team reveal who exactly drafted the press release and who authorized it. The Galaxy maker today filed a brief responding to Judge Koh’s request which explains Samsung’s reasoning behind the unusual move…

According to The Wall Street Journal, Samsung publicized the exhibits “in response to requests from media” and denied any wrongdoing:

Far from violating any order, Samsung’s transmission to the public of public information disclosed in pretrial filings is entirely consistent with this Court’s statements that the “workings of litigation must be open to public view”.

The released material includes slides showing Samsung’s various phone designs and an excerpt from the deposition of Apple’s former designer Shin Nishibori. It’s interesting that those links are no longer working.

This trial has just begun and Samsung has already angered the Judge.

It wasn’t some random hiccup.

Samsung and Apple have all the money to hire the best lawyers out there and their respective legal teams are presumably some of the best minds in patent litigation.

That the company released excluded evidence indicates that Samsung’s strategy may be hanging on its Sony-fied iPhone design assertion.

Whether or not the move will backfire remains to be seen.

In my opinion, Samsung has partially achieved its goal.

Those jurors read papers and consume media coverage related to the case just as the other guy.

Should Samsung be punished for going public with the exhibits?

  • Share:
  • Follow:
  • Yan Kar

    i will give credits to samsung for being smarter. Will it helps.. i doubt, apple bought all those judges long time ago. They spent a good amount of money to insert their people at the key positions.

    • http://www.GoldenGateDomains.com/ Golden Gate Domains

      I’d love to see your “evidence” to prove that notion……..

    • http://twitter.com/Chindavon Chindavon

      Fella, you are smokin’ some serious crack. Not only does Samsung steal, they cheat as well.

      • http://twitter.com/Pitchy Pitchy

        You are delusional if you believe that Apple does not steal or cheat “as well”.

    • YujinNY

      i use to work with korean and chinese companies that manufacture products for american companies..they always said that they can copy, steal and do as they want..is not like americans can go invade their country for patent issues…plus in asia the concept of intellectual property is as foreign as eating dog is to us.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jeff-Laing/100000029389036 Jeff Laing

      Acting “smarter” than the judge is a great way to get yourself slapped with a contempt charge, probably related to “attempted jury tampering”.

      There are ‘temporal’ aspects to a trial – the fact that the information can be made available to the public *after* the verdict does not mean that it can be made *before* – otherwise the courts ability to control what evidence is and is not admissible becomes moot.

      If the court does not find them in contempt, it’s going to set an insanely bad precedent.

  • http://twitter.com/oo7plasma Brandon

    i dont think i even care anymore lol

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=604885391 Richard Borkovec

    The judge said she wouldn’t grant privacy to EITHER corporation during this case, hence why the public knew about these documents before this. If she’s so mad about it, she should have just granted the privacy BOTH corporations asked for. She can’t do anything about it, plain and simple.

    • maurid

      Wow we’ve got a lawyer over here ;)

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=604885391 Richard Borkovec

        It’s called common sense. This judge dug her own grave with this by denying the privacy requests. She wanted publicity, and now that she has it and it’s backfired on her, she can’t take it.

      • maurid

        I wasn’t being sarcastic, I was actually surprised by your knowledge :) Whether you consider that “common sense”…

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=604885391 Richard Borkovec

        I didn’t mean it in a negative way towards you, I just figured that reading she denied them both privacy in this, that she pretty much shot herself in the foot on this one haha.

  • http://www.facebook.com/joe.jonsen Joe Jonsen

    eh boring

  • http://www.facebook.com/xxLIUZHENYUxx Liu Zhenyu

    Hey douchbags leave the blog fandroids

  • http://twitter.com/ButchArri Edward (Butch) Arri

    Not that it matters, but the first image I saw associated with this leak was the iPod Nano aluminum enclosure with a touch screen face…Since no one working at Sony created the design and there was no such thing as a capacitive touchscreen phone at the time to say that something that someone designed without having worked at Sony and without Sony having come up with a capacitive touch device is just moronic.