Quote:
Originally Posted by jgaiser
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?
|
Well, for one thing, I would like to see the case evolve beyond one judge's opinion sans jury.
There is a lot more to this story than some are willing to admit. Here is a story from CNN
http://features.blogs.fortune.cnn.co.../?iid=HP_River
Apparently appointing a monitor at all in a case like this is a very unusual act, as is appointing a monitor who has the close personal ties that this person seems to have with Judge Cote. It sure seems a lot like Bromwich is trying to rack up as many hours as he can before the appeal hearings come to pass.