Quote:
Originally Posted by stonetools
Well, Apple would argue that it did not break the law because there was no collusion. That's Apple's first line of defense.
|
A perfectly sound and reasonable defense. The only one that's applicable in fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stonetools
Its second line of defense is that what they did led to a more competive market.
|
That's not a second line of defense. That's not even relevant—even if it were provably true. Illegal collusion to fix prices is the charge. Any other factors being introduced to the discussion are strictly diversionary in nature.