Quote:
Originally Posted by pwalker8
My bottom line issue is that I fail to see how a company can be accused of monopolistic practices when they aren't even in the market yet. In general, it appears that the prosecutor was unable to prove any of the normal things one most prove in a monopoly case, which is why the prosecutor introduced their novel legal theory that Apple should be held to a new standard.
|
Funny. I thought Apple was convicted of price-fixing, not monopoly. Actually they were convicted of advising and promoting price-fixing by working with multiple publishers, who by the way, all admitted the charges and settled with the Justice Department.
Spin away...