View Single Post
Old 12-06-2013, 06:45 PM   #27
jgaiser
Omnivorous
jgaiser ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jgaiser ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jgaiser ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jgaiser ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jgaiser ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jgaiser ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jgaiser ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jgaiser ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jgaiser ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jgaiser ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.jgaiser ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
jgaiser's Avatar
 
Posts: 3,283
Karma: 27978909
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Rural NW Oregon
Device: Kindle Voyage, Kindle Fire HD, Kindle 3, KPW1
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwalker8 View Post
Obviously the "any stick to beat Apple" crowd in this thread will dismiss such views since it doesn't fit their world view, but there really is, or should be a limit on what an individual judge can do. It will be interesting to watch the appeal process. Apparently, Cote is starting to back pedal a bit on her decree.
I'm not a "any stick to beat Apple" commenter. I own both an iPad and and iPhone and like them both.

But, exactly how should a corporation who have been found guilty of price-fixing be treated?

It seems reasonable to me that their day-to-day activities be monitored. I'm sorry that they don't like the fact that they have to pay for that monitoring and they don't like the fact that the monitor is asking for things they don't like, but hey... They could have settled like the rest of the defendants. They didn't and now they pay the price for their gamble.

How do *you* think they should be treated?

Last edited by jgaiser; 12-06-2013 at 06:47 PM.
jgaiser is offline   Reply With Quote