Quote:
Originally Posted by pwalker8
Sigh. I see no point to this. I'm not going to dig back through all my research just so you can ignore what I post or attack it because you think you can score points. You want to think that Judge Cote didn't pre-judge against Apple, fine. It's your privilege to believe that the sky is green and grass is blue if you want. If you actually want to do research on legal matters, then quite a bit of information is behind pay walls. Good legal analysis is actually worth money to a lot of people.
Ultimately, it doesn't matter, Apple has settled the specific lawsuit this thread was started to discuss. When the final amount becomes public, we will have a better idea what this was all about.
As far as the Apple anti-trust lawsuit goes, we will see what the appeal courts rule.
|
I'm not ignoring what you post. I've looked back at the previous thread where you insisted that there were links and none of your posts included links. I went and looked at the thread before that in case you were just mistaken about the thread, but there were a few links that I couldn't follow they were not in posts that suggested that the links include such an admission by the judge nor was there such an admission in the links that I could follow.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwalker8
Item one is why Apple was included in the charge. Apple has lots and lots of cash.
|
No, Apple was included in the charge because of evidence of antitrust violation.