|
And linking to some dude's blog that says "yo, dude, Apple gets smacked down, Friggin' awesome, man!" doesn't exactly prove that the ruling was a smack down either. I posted to wall street journal link simply to show that there were actually other view, something that some might not realize if they simply stayed inside the "I hate Apple" echo chamber.
As I pointed out in that post, it's hardly a shock that the WSJ would take the stance that they have. It's been their consistent stance all along. If you read the WSJ, it's not so much that they are pro-Apple, that they dislike government intervention in private business. Sometime it helps to understand a source's history and where they are coming from when you are trying to judge how much weight to give their opinion.
I've already said that anyone who says they know how this is going to turn out doesn't know what they are talking about. Apple's appeal could very well fail. Since they haven't made their formal arguments and we don't know yet, what the appeal will be based on, it's very hard to to say. I personally think that Cote overstepped her bounds and failed to give adequate deference to the Supreme Court, but that opinion and $5 will buy you a cup of coffee at Starbucks. This will go on for quite some time. I fully expect it to go to the Supreme Court no matter which way the 2nd Appeals court rules unless something changes dramatically.
|