Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg
https://books.google.com/books?id=yS...an-act&f=false
And the Apple conviction was indeed for Section 1:
http://www.lathropgage.com/newsletter-108.html
So what do people think? Was it not a clear-cut violation? Or was there favoritism towards a big company with many defenders?
Of course, they didn't charge the publishers with criminal anti-trust either, even though the publishers are much smaller than Apple. Was that an example of favortism towards medium sized companies with many defenders? Or was it another case of the Justice Department going after people who weren't clear-cut violators? Defenders of the US legal system are welcome to inform me which it is.
|
We are still waiting for the 2nd to rule on the appeal. I've already been pretty clear on what my opinion on the matter is (i.e. that the whole case turned anti-trust law on it's head, using anti-trust prosecution to protect a monopolistic company from competition and that Judge Cote ignored the current Supreme Court rulings). We won't know how this turns out until the 2nd issues it's ruling. I have no idea when that will be.