Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 06 2012 @ 11:30 AM EST |
it sounds like Apple lawyers are in a bind, They really have three choices,
they can admit that they know about it before the verdict but did not come
forward (and tick off the Judge)
or
they can admit that they did not know about it, and that they have no valid
reason to say that Samsung should have known. (and loose that point)
Or
they can convince the Judge that they dont have to answer.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 06 2012 @ 11:33 AM EST |
Who is "Apple" with respect to that question? Figuring that out in
detail, as well as making sure one gets the correct answer from all the relevant
people in a best effort and conscience manner is a lot of work.
If "Apple" were a single person and mind, yes, there would be little
excuse for not just answering.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 06 2012 @ 08:01 PM EST |
Reasons for Apple's attorney's refusal to answer
1) Increase billable hours. Hmm, runs the risk of getting either the client or
the other party mad about padding the bill. Since somebody ends up paying the
bill, this is probably not a good idea.
2) Playing mind games with Samsung attorneys. Might be fun to mess with them,
but will probably result in sanctions.
3) Know the answer will reveal more problems. Might be worth taking the risk if
answering the question results in more trouble.
I kinda vote for #3 with a side of #2.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, November 06 2012 @ 08:55 PM EST |
It is also maximising its time to come up with a good spin
It might also have decided it needed to guarantee that it could appeal,
rather than Samsung, again maximising Samsungs costs, including
distracting top management and leadership.
Also, the right set of facts might just get Apple a change of legal
representation, involving still more delay to Samsung....for example if Some
non-lawyer at Apple corporate wrote an e-mail to Apple legal impeaching
Mr Hogan saying they knew it but were advised not to disclose it and did
not until after Hogan shot off his mouth....
(Christenson)
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, November 07 2012 @ 08:12 AM EST |
Sleight of hand?
They make a big play about this to distract Samsung from seeing what they are
really afraid of.
What that maybe I don't know.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|