As the courtroom battles between Apple and Samsung drag on… and on, Apple has made a request of the court to exclude some statements made by Steve Jobs from court documents, and while they’re at it, could they please obscure the Samsung logo on those monitors sitting in the courtroom?
Apple wants the court to exclude any “argument or evidence regarding statements attributed to Steve Jobs by Walter Isaacson”. This one obviously relates to the “thermonuclear war” quote and similar rhetoric… Apple furthermore wants the court to exclude “any reference to working conditions in China”.
Apple is also requesting that all Samsung logos be obscured from the monitors being used in the courtroom. Analysts say that by seeing the Samsung logo on the court monitors, the jurors could get a sub-conscious impression that the courtroom is “Samsung territory” and it may slant their decision making process in Samsung’s favor.
Samsung is also in a requesting mood, as it has requested that the court exclude “Apple related blogs, and articles by non-expert newspaper reporters, regarding any assessment of Apple and Samsung and/or their products.” Samsung is arguing that “[t]he ‘cultural significance’ of Apple’s designs and Apple’s ‘commitment to design’ are not at issue in this litigation”.
In related legal news, Judge Richard A. Posner, who is presiding over an Apple v. Motorola patent lawsuit that will go to trial in two months, had previously called a claim construction submitted by Motorola as “ridiculous,” but now he appears to be pushing back against Apple.
Apple had brought a motion to stop Motorola from expelling an expert. The judge had denied a similar motion just a couple of days before. The repetitive filings brought harsh words from Judge Posner: “I deny the second half of Apple’s motion (seeking prohibition of the deposition) as frivolous and the first half (seeking substitution) as untimely. I’ve had my fill of frivolous filings by Apple. The next such motion, and I shall forbid it to file any motions without first moving for leave to file.”
In other words, Apple will have to file a motion to request to file a motion. Which in itself seems repetitive.
In still other legal news, yeah there’s more, there’s always more, Aftermath Records, a division of Universal Music Group, is about to go to trial in a case to determine what money is owed to producers for various Eminem records. And in yet ANOTHER case, a class action against UMG brought by numerous musicians, the plaintiffs are demanding to see trial exhibits, expert reports, depositions and other documents from the Eminem case.
This discovery request has brought strong objections from Apple, who says the plaintiffs have not shown that the documents they’ve requested are relevant.
And the legal wrangling continues…