Judge Koh on Samsung’s quest to use ‘2001: A Space Odyssey’ as ‘evidence’ against Apple: Nope

“While there are no court proceedings on Thursday, Judge Lucy Koh issued a variety of rulings further limiting the types of evidence Samsung can use to argue that Apple’s patents are either invalid or not infringed,” Ina Fried reports for AllThingsD.

“In an order on Thursday, Koh upheld a magistrate judge’s contention that, for example, Samsung cannot use devices shown in the 1968 movie “2001: A Space Odyssey” as part of its case that Apple’s patents are invalid,” Fried reports.

Fried reports, “The trial resumes on Friday with Apple Senior VP Phil Schiller due to return to the witness stand. Schiller testified only briefly on Tuesday before court ended for the day.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: You know Samsung’s in trouble when their best “evidence” proves absolutely nothing and is routinely excluded by the judge as if Samsung were joking.

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Arline M.” for the heads up.]

Related articles:
German court rejects Samsung’s ’2001: A Space Odyssey’ defense of Galaxy Tab – September 17, 2011
Samsung’s 2001 Stanley Kubrick defense debunked – August 24, 2011
Samsung cites Stanley Kubrick’s ’2001: A Space Odyssey’ movie as prior art against iPad design patent – August 23, 2011

Apple asks Judge Koh to rule in its favor after Samsung’s excluded evidence leak – August 2, 2012
Apple says it will seek sanctions over Samsung’s press release of excluded evidence – August 2, 2012
The 125-year-old U.S. patent law that could cost Samsung $2 billion for slavishly copying Apple’s designs – August 1, 2012
Samsung defends decision to share excluded evidence with media – August 1, 2012
Apple says jury should learn that Samsung destroyed evidence – August 1, 2012
Samsung, after ‘begging’ to get Sony into Apple patent trial, flouts judge and releases ‘excluded evidence’ anyway – July 31, 2012
Apple v. Samsung Live Blog: Trial opens with one juror gone, Samsung begging – July 31, 2012
Apple attorney: Instead of innovating, Samsung chose to copy iPhone and iPad – July 31, 2012
Apple aims for total war, salted earth in Samsung patent infringement fight – July 31, 2012
Apple-Samsung jury picked to decide U.S. patent trial; Google engineer fails to make final cut – July 30, 2012

56 Comments

    1. Only the part at the end where Bowman is dying and the towering monolith appears. Superimposed on it, the words “We DID invent the rectangle, Earthlings. Deal with it.”

        1. Yet if we, for a minute, would talk seriously about this laughable matter, then it has to be said that this film’s example does not showcase a computing tablet, it is rather shows videophone — which is totally different category. Besides, the design is different.

  1. The ‘evidence’ won’t be admitted because there are no ‘devices’ in 2001 – A Space Odyssey. This has been clearly pointed out that what the crew were looking at were computer
    monitors streaming a TV feed from Earth, not a removable tablet device.

    1. I didn’t even realize they were stupid enough to seriously try this ‘evidence of prior art’. I thought this was just nonsense the fandroids were screaming about at engadget- amazing that Samsungs reps are dumb enough to try this bit of flim-flam.

      2001 is a fucking Sci-Fi movie. Much like star wars and star trek it’s conceptualized thing’s that didn’t exist in 1968 by a long shot.

      Because I can DREAM or something, doesn’t make it prior art. If I were to develope a ‘star-gate’, ‘warp-drive’, or ‘transporter’ you’d better fucking believe I’d get a patent on it and that patent would hold up till the day it expired. It’s simply laughable to suggest that because a similar device was dreamt up by a science fiction writer 50 years ago that the IP isn’t patentable.

      Samsung is tripping all over themselves to lose this thing ASAP

  2. Whatever the outcome, it will be contested and there will be a retrial. Another judge may or may not allow the evidence Samsung requests, but that alone is pretty good grounds for a retrial. And my guess is Samsung is setting up the groundwork for a retrial as it knows it will up on the loosing end this time out.

    Who knows, maybe Samsung will make a settlement offer before it gets to the jury, but it looks doubtful Sammy will exit with their shirt.

  3. Does Samsung think they can get away with this insane crap because the judge is Korean?

    How many times does Lucy Koh have to slap them down before they realize she pretty obviously isn’t playing that game?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.