By 
More news today from the three-ring circus that is the Apple v. Samsung patent trial to end all patent trials (actually, it probably won’t be the end of patent trials by a long shot). After Apple filed a 75 page brief detailing the 22 witnesses they would call upon in rebuttal to Samsung’s portion of the trial, Judge Lucy Koh looked attorney William Lee dead in the eye, and, doing her best impersonation of Judge Judy, scolded, “unless you’re smoking crack you know these witnesses aren’t going to be called.”
OK, so we can’t confirm how Judge Judy-esque Koh’s delivery actually was, but nonetheless she continues to make a name for herself after making several controversial decisions to place preliminary injunctions on Samsung products including members of the Galaxy line of phones and tablets. Her antics have been the main attraction of the trial, and Koh continues to come across as generally irritable in having to sit through the petty squabble between the two parties. She has insisted that the pair save us all the trouble and attempt to settle things out of court.
Apple’s response to Koh’s suggestion that crack was being smoked during the compilation of the new document was equally entertaining. A straight-faced Lee responded, “I’m not smoking crack. I can promise you that.” Judge Koh’s troubles stemmed from the length of the document, insisting that reading it would be a waste of the court’s time. Apple has agreed to trim it down.
[via DroidDog]
Thats right he wasnt smoking crack, he was smoking bath salts. Watch out Judge he might eat your face :P
And then sit in her chair with a cup of apple juice chanting “Winning” after he’s done.
You mean cup of tiger blood?
Best comment.
‘Today… I’m not smoking crack today, yet.’
That whole company smokes crack,
Thats right he isnt smoking crack, he is smoking bath salts. Watch out Judge Koh he might eat your face :P
judge 1, crack 0
Why did you make a quote in the headline if that’s not what the judge actually said?
It is what the judge actually said. He was unsure of the comparison to Judge Judy.
Technically she said, “unless you’re smoking crack…” which is different from what is in the title. I’m not sure if the single parenthesis means it is not an exact quote…english majors and/or scholars, can someone help?
“unless you’re smoking crack” is not “Are you smoking crack?”
The single quotation marks are generally used to indicate a paraphrase.
That wasn’t a quote ” This is a quote ” unsure what ‘Unsure’ but know that’s not a quote thou.
He wasn’t smoking anything but the fine cuban cigars Apple is giving him and his team to win the case.
Everybody lies!
He was probly going to say apple has that paton on crack too
I would have to agree with Judge Koh, Is Apple smoking crack? Also somebody should remind Apple theit upcoming iOS 6 has a map too similar to Google Map. So isn’t that a bit hypocritic?
Don’t matter Google won’t sue like Apple. I put my money on it Apple already submitted patents then will sue Google cause there Maps violate patents.
for a split sec i was like, judge judy?
read article and saw her name now
this isn’t twitter, you can edit your comment, and it can be more than a haiku.
amazing
It’s a good thing apple didn’t say yes to smoking crack. It might have started the new fad of smoking crack around the country.
Crackheads everywhere agree apple that apple IS smoking crack. It’s clear that Samsung is smoking pot. That’s why it took them such a long time to pay attention to what was going on around it.
Sumsung’s like, inspired by nature, man.
See this is the problem with the American patent system: even the judges can’t be bothered reading the evidence. This is an important case which could bring about much needed patent reform, and she can’t be bothered to read what someone believes to be substantive facts and witness statements.
This attitude is how shitty patents get passed in the first place. Pathetic.
yeah but you have to admit 75 witnesses in rebuttal to Samsung’s portion of the trial is pretty dang steep considering apples patents are mostly garbage. What I didn’t like is refusing to allow important evidence because it was late or whatever. Yes I know that is how it works mostly but for this trial really be fair and resolve anything all the important evidence needed to be included.
sorry I read that wrong it’s 75 pages and 22 witnesses. Yeah she should have at least read that. I still think 22 rebuttal witnesses is high but I agree refusing to listed time both sides arguments isn’t going to solve everything.
Its not that she cant be bothered to read the provided information, its that she believes that all of the 22 witnesses will not be called. She is annoyed that Apple is wasting the court’s and Samsung’s time with items they have no intention of using.
I don’t see any problem with her asking for them to trim down the fat of their witness list.
You mean she didn’t read the user agreement from apple? let’s all put our stunned faces on. I’m deleting my iTunes account today.
That would be iCrack. Patent filed in 2007.
There are 22 people in support of software patents? How the hell?
You know they can’t be engineers.
Of course they’re engineers and software engineers @ that.
What apple have yet to find out (which they will when the Court of he ks names and addresses) is that they’re xda developers for Android and the money they just got paid will allow them to work full time for 5 years on android.
Woop
Is there any question anymore that this judge is just out to make a name for herself, which really brings into question her actual decisions, be it be against Apple or Samsung it doesn’t matter, this is a sham of a trial…
the fruit company was founded by hippies
Huh. She seems to be cracking down on them. (Really, this was all your fault for not making that joke sooner)
Men, she ain’t cracking down on any apple. She’s just realized apple’s been peddling crap all along and that she’s made a fool of herself in some decisions in those judgments she gave apple that should never have been given cos, it only emboldened apple to continue this bullying and arm twisting which is all based on ENVY.
LG ENVY? o_O
No way the Apple counsel is smoking crack.
…pure cocaine, maybe, but not crack.
Maybe they are smoking Crack Lite™. It’s a third less addictive than regular crack.
it’s possible that while they weren’t smoking crack, perhaps they were huffing the embalming fluid used on steve jobs.