Apple Vs Samsung Day 3: Samsung Explains Themselves
Michael Harper for redOrbit.com – Your Universe Online
In the aftermath of Samsung’s little temper tantrum on Tuesday, news sites spent the majority of the day discussing their interesting tactics of seemingly appealing to the court of public opinion, and wondering what, if anything, their release of images of the Samsung F700 would prove.
Samsung’s lawyer, John Quinn, began the court session on Tuesday by begging Judge Lucy Koh to allow the Korean company to submit some drawings and other documents as evidence in the hearing. Judge Koh had previously denied this same request three times, and was none too pleased with Quinn pushing the matter. According to Thompson Reuters, when Judge Koh once more denied the Samsung request, Quinn began to get upset, saying, “What’s the point of having a trial?”
Koh responded, “Mr. Quinn, please, please, we have done three reconsiderations on this. You’ve made your record.”
Quinn pressed the matter further, begging for explanation when Judge Koh shut him down.
“Mr. Quinn, don’t make me sanction you, please!” the judge barked. “I want you to sit down, please.”
When opening statements were over and lunch had been eaten, some select journalists were surprised to see a very interesting press statement land in their email inboxes containing the exact evidence Judge Koh had previously denied 3 times.
“The excluded evidence would have established beyond doubt that Samsung did not copy the iPhone design,” the statement said. “Fundamental fairness requires that the jury decide the case based on all the evidence.”
Shortly after Koh had sent the jury home for the day, Apple’s lawyer Harold McElhinny brought the press statement to Koh’s opinion, saying, “This is an intentional attempt to pollute this jury.”
He later added that the press statement should be considered “contempt of court.”
A visibly upset Judge Koh told the Samsung team to call Quinn, who had already left for the day to head to an event in Los Angeles.
“I want to know who drafted the press release, who authorized it from your legal team,” Koh said, “and I want Mr. Quinn’s declaration as to what his role was.”
Mr. Quinn offered his declaration today and, though it comes as no surprise to many, said his actions were neither illegal or unethical, instead blaming Apple for issuing “false representations” about Samsung’s move.
“These false representations by Apple’s counsel publicly and unfairly called my personal reputation into question and have resulted in media reports likewise falsely impugning me personally.”
As Quinn tells it, Samsung sent out the press statement simply as a matter of response to press inquiries about the rejected evidence. Mr. Quinn even attached a redacted email he claims came from a journalist. As a side note, these redacted emails offer some interesting insight. As you might expect, the screen shots show a Windows machine being used. One signature reads, “Sent from my Samsung on AT&T.”
These things are to be expected. The interesting thing about these emails, however, is that the supposed journalist seeking information from Quinn seems lost on how Samsung plans to use the Sony designer’s — Shin Nishibori — testimony and BusinessWeek interview against Apple.
Closing out his statements, Quinn writes: “Samsung’s brief statement and transmission of public materials in response to press inquiries was not motivated by or designed to influence jurors.”
”The members of the jury had already been selected at the time of the statement and the transmission of these public exhibits, and had been specifically instructed not to read any form of media relating to this case.”
The trial won’t begin again until Friday, so we may have to wait until then to hear Koh’s response on the matter.
What will happen today? Check back with redOrbit for more.