Quote:
Originally Posted by howyoudoin
I realise he isn't here to defend himself, but then this isn't a personal charge. It's Apple that's being charged with masterminding the collusion, and they're answerable for the actions of the person they appointed to act on their behalf. It's not like Jobs is being held personally responsible. As far as the court is concerned, Jobs and Apple are the same party, and Apple exists to answer to any charges. I agree with what you say when it comes to individual liability.
|
That is the part I keep 'not getting'. Apple was not fixing prices;
they were not their prices to fix.
Are they being charged with accessory to conspiracy to collude to fix prices?
I'm not trying to be difficult, I really just don't understand.