Quote:
Originally Posted by PatNY
Apple has yet to petition to have Cote removed, and doing so would be a very long shot, to say the least, as it appears there is no substantive basis to the charge of bias and overreaching. There’s a good reason to keep the same judge through cases like this – because it could take a new judge months just to get up to speed with all the evidence, players and issues involved. The burdens on the Apple lawyers to prove bias and overreaching would be overwhelming. I would be surprised if they even attempted to get Cote removed.
In a case like this involving very complex anti-trust laws, Apple would likely agree to whatever their lawyers tell them is the proper course, since money is no object. Therefore, their lawyers could appeal up the kazoo and only when slapped down innumerable times -- and possibly even by the Supreme Court -- will they put down their weapons and stop racking up the big billing hours. A less wealthy client might, of course, have already agreed to all the court-ordered sanctions by now and told their lawyers to just settle and have the fines paid. The lawyers for the big 5 have more or less stopped their major billing phases. But Apple’s lawyers carry on in full battle gear – and in full billing mode as well. As I said, money may not be the only factor, but I believe it is a major one. And Apple is likely all too willing to make their lawyers rich and contribute to their retirement and children’s college funds. They are a willing partner in what I think will end up to be meaningless litigation. But the point remains, money and billable hours may be a primary motivating factor – obscured by all the charges of bias and overreaching.
--Pat
|
I suspect the strongest motivating factor is that Apple really does believe they are innocent and will eventually win. Otherwise, Apple would have settled long ago without having to admit guilt.
I seriously doubt this is a situation where a law firm is trying to milk Apple for lots of money. Apple has a pretty good staff of lawyers who can give Apple legal advice to keep them from being taken to the cleaners like that.. Theodore Boutrous is the lead lawyer for Apple in this case and is one of the top lawyers in the nation for appeals. He's very successful at what he does and isn't known for leading his clients on.
Most reputable lawyers actually tend to be quite honest and upfront with clients as to the likelihood of success. I have no idea what Boutrous is telling Apple with regards to the likelihood of success. As far as I can tell, 3rd party lawyers who comment on the case (as opposed to Apple fans or Apple bashers) seem pretty much split on the matter. Some say that Apple has a good case for getting the judgement overturned, while others say they don't.