5 ms·
UK judge who issued ruling for Samsung against Apple hired by Samsung
- coob 14y agoHe couldn't wait a year to make it seem less suspicious?
- glimmung 14y agoWhat is suspicious about it?
- nym 14y agoI scratch your back, you give me job.
- Kylekramer 14y agoThat will involve the judge also getting two other judges to risk career suicide in order to get a consulting job for one of them.
- fnordfnordfnord 14y ago>risk career suicide When is the last time a judge was fired or disbarred for failure to recuse himself over a conflict of interest?
- glimmung 14y agoJust a lazy slur then.
- onemorepassword 14y agoOn the plus side, unlike many judges and prosecutors in various copyright cases at least he didn't get on the payroll until after the verdict...
- meaty 14y agoUntil next time.
- UnoriginalGuy 14y agoAn expert in intellectual property and one of THREE judges in the appeal. While it does seem incestuous, I don't know how niche this area is in general. It is like reading about people jumping ship between regulators and industry, it certainly seems "wrong" from a common sense perspective but how many experts are there?
- tinco 14y agoI don't think it's wrong at all even from a common sense perspective when you look at the facts. If you are a company and you are in a lawsuit you are allowed to call an expert in to defend your position. Companies always choose an expert who is likely to agree with them (as do their opponents!). This guy is an expert in both law and the particular kind of cases. He has also already shown to Samsung that he has a view on the matters that are in line with Samsungs interests. As a judge he comes across as a trustworthy expert. Why not hire him? And for the judge, why not be hired? The case is done, he's not likely to rule between Apple and Samsung again for obvious reasons.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- thorum 14y agoI wonder how often corporations quietly let judges know that if they rule a certain way, there will be a high-paying position reserved for them 1-2 years down the road...
- daigoba66 14y agoProbably not often at all. I don't know about UK bribery laws but that is very likely illegal both for the corporation and the judge.
- SEMW 14y ago> I don't know about UK bribery laws As of 2010, more or less the toughest in the world: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bribery_Act_2010 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bribery_Act_2010 (which has been criticised as going too far for effectively criminalising e.g. corporate hospitality).
- monochromatic 14y agoThis article can't point to any evidence of impropriety, so it substitutes vague innuendo. Pretty weak.
- SEMW 14y agoThe UK judiciary is famous for setting aside judgments when there's even a hint of the possibility of conflict of interest, certainly compared to other countries. E.g. the House of Lords in 2000 set aside its own ruling on the extradition of Pinochet ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinochet_(No._1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinochet_(No._1) ) because one of the Judges was on the board of an arm of Amnesty International, who submitted an amicus brief in the case. Florian Mueller's 'lax British practices, this would never happen in the US' insinuation is amusingly ridiculous.