Thanks for the links. Most of the pro-Apple clique like to argue that Cote will be overturned because she was "clearly prejudicial", as though the only evidence she could be looking at was after the trial started, instead of the months of prep work with all of the pretrial discovery and the documentation from the publishers. I also hadn't seen the comments about the demeanor of Apple's star witnesses.
Quote:
She criticized the publishers and Apple executives not only for what she clearly views as their participation in a conspiracy, but also for their lack of credibility on the stand, calling out Macmillan CEO John Sargent and S&S CEO Carolyn Reidy by name as among the most “unreliable” witnesses.
"Their demeanor changed dramatically depending on whether Apple or the Plaintiffs were questioning them,” Cote observed. “They were adamant in denials until confronted with documents or their prior deposition testimony; instead of answering questions in a straightforward manner, they would pick apart the question and answer it narrowly or avoid answering it altogether."
|
Of course, Steve Jobs' iPad rollout comments were pretty damning also.
Oh, and PED's mea culpa, wasn't much of a mea culpa, in my opinion. He didn't understand why Apple and the publishers were on trial instead of Amazon, and he admits that he was taking Eddy Cue's testimony and Apple's lawyers' spin at face value, and then was shocked when the judge didn't buy it. He was apologizing for taking a layman's view of the trial instead of a lawyer's view, and now he's back at the pro-Apple, anti-Amazon spin campaign.