Quote:
Originally Posted by Shane R
What Judge Cote wrote in her judgement against Apple and what she instructed the monitor to do were at odds. The appeals court has instructed her and the monitor to stick to what her original judgement was.
It also appears that Apple had no objection to the antitrust monitor being in her original judgement, as it excepted it from appeal:
http://features.blogs.fortune.cnn.co...ple-antitrust/ |
You forgot this part from the article:
Quote:
|
She stressed that the companies' highest officials and lawyers had participated in the conspiracy, and expressed her belief in her written ruling that at least three Apple officials had lied in their testimony before her.
|
How was it unexpected that the monitor would ask to interview the highest officials? The result of the appeal makes it clear that this is what the monitor was supposed to do.