Apple gripes about antitrust monitoring

[jgaiser]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Prosecutors do it because currently, there is no downside. Even if they lose, they just move on with no penalty. In this case, Apple is a big enough company that they can afford to fight the case and have the willingness to fight what they perceive as an injustice. I fully expect them to win in appeals. Judge Cote gets overturned frequently.

Of course they perceive an injustice. They lost the gamble. Just because you and Apple see an injustice doesn't make it one. The case was pretty clear cut and the the Judge's rulings seem to leave little for Apple to make a successful appeal on. Guess will just have to wait and see how upper courts rule.

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Does it really matter?

IMHO there are very few people in this world who deserve to be paid $1000 an hour. Maybe even no one. $1000 an hour is $840.000 a month.

There are many well-learned and hard-working people in this world that will take 10 years to earn such an amount of money, and they will still be considered to have a well-paid job. (At least, in The Netherlands.)

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

IMHO there are very few people in this world who deserve to be paid $1000 an hour. Maybe even no one. $1000 an hour is $840.000 a month.

There are many well-learned and hard-working people in this world that will take 10 years to earn such an amount of money, and they will still be considered to have a well-paid job. (At least, in The Netherlands.)

Whether it's right and whether it's legal are two separate things.

We live in a world where this is a reality, that people make that kind of money without really doing anything special to deserve it more than anyone else. That doesn't mean it's illegal, and this is on par with the ridiculous kind of money lawyers in general get for doing lawyerly things.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

IMHO there are very few people in this world who deserve to be paid $1000 an hour. Maybe even no one. $1000 an hour is $840.000 a month.

There are many well-learned and hard-working people in this world that will take 10 years to earn such an amount of money, and they will still be considered to have a well-paid job. (At least, in The Netherlands.)

There are also thousands of barely literate trogs that earn millions a year just for running and jumping or grunting or whatever.
Each career and trade has its own standards set by how society values it.
Neither education, intelligence, or dilligence is a guarantee of prosperity.

In this case the billing rate at least is a function of all three plus experience and earned reputation, not how well he shakes his rear.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

There are also thousands of barely literate trogs that earn millions a year just for running and jumping or grunting or whatever.
Neither education, intelligence, or dilligence is a guarantee of prosperity.
In this case the billing rate at least is a function of all three plus experience and earned reputation not how well he shakes his rear.

That's an excellent point too!

[SleepyBob]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

$1000 an hour is $840.000 a month.

Not on this planet, it isn't. Very few of us work anywhere close to 27 hours a day.

[John F]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Yep, can't really expect serious discussion here, the "any stick to beat Apple with" crowd is unwilling to do anything than mock and throw out ad homiem attacks (for those unfamilar with the term, it's a rhetorical device which involves attacking the person rather than addressing the matter at hand. The person in this case is Apple).

IMO, the "ad homiem" attacks are a nice counter to the "Amazon is satan" defense.

[fjtorres]

Apple ought to keep this in mind:
http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/b...arly-2014.html

Meanwhile, consumers could see another round of refunds at some point in the future. On July 10, 2013, Apple was found liable for its role in the price-fixing scheme with the publishers, and is currently litigating its potential money damages. Apple's damages trial is set for May of 2014, and a recent estimate from the plaintiffs put Apple's damages at nearly $308 million, which the judge could triple, putting Apple's high-end damage award at nearly $924 million.

Treble damages are usually reserved for willful, unrepentant culprits, so if Apple squeals like a stuck pig at the monitor fees, their howls will be heard on Mars if the damages spproach a billion.

Mind you, that would be less than one percent of their hoard, but with their attitudes...

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by SleepyBob

Not on this planet, it isn't. Very few of us work anywhere close to 27 hours a day.

A month does not have 31 working days in the Netherlands... It has an average of 21. (Excluding leave, christmas, etc).

[CWatkinsNash]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

A month does not have 31 working days in the Netherlands... It has an average of 21. (Excluding leave, christmas, etc).

Which comes to 168 hours @ $1000 = $168,000, not $840,000.

[kennyc]

Hmmmm and they say the U.S. is falling behind in math and science.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by CWatkinsNash

Which comes to 168 hours @ $1000 = $168,000, not $840,000.

Assuming he bills 8 hours a day...
Most lawyers run multiple projects in parallel so billing full time to one case is not guaranteed.

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Hmmmm and they say the U.S. is falling behind in math and science.

Hm. Yeah. That was an epic blunder. There are not 40 hours in one day. That's a work week.

(I actually calculated 40 hours * 21 days * $1000 = $840.000.)

OK, the rest is somewhat off-topic.

Spoiler:

Still, $168K is three times as much per month as a salary considered to be a very nice gross salary per year in the Netherlands, assuming you have a normal job. Such a lawyer earns a salary of about €1.45 million, a year, which is about 9-10 times as much as our prime minister.

To be honest, I think salaries like those (and the ones going to movie stars, soccer players, and so on, which are even more out of proportion) are the entire problem in this world. (I'm not even talking about things like €25 million golden handshakes and €50 million pension plans...) Too few people have too much of the money.

Same goes for companies as well. I think it's ridiculous that companies such as Apple and Microsoft have cash reserves big enough to pay the national debt of some of the smaller countries in this world, and still keep a nice amount of cash handy.

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

Hm. Yeah. That was an epic blunder. There are not 40 hours in one day. That's a work week.

(I actually calculated 40 hours * 21 days * $1000 = $840.000.)

OK, the rest is somewhat off-topic.

Spoiler:

Still, $168K is three times as much per month as a salary considered to be a very nice gross salary per year in the Netherlands, assuming you have a normal job. Such a lawyer earns a salary of about €1.45 million, a year, which is about 9-10 times as much as our prime minister.

To be honest, I think salaries like those (and the ones going to movie stars, soccer players, and so on, which are even more out of proportion) are the entire problem in this world. (I'm not even talking about things like €25 million golden handshakes and €50 million pension plans...) Too few people have too much of the money.

Same goes for companies as well. I think it's ridiculous that companies such as Apple and Microsoft have cash reserves big enough to pay the national debt of some of the smaller countries in this world, and still keep a nice amount of cash handy.

Are you assuming that the $1000 go into the lawyer's pocket? Just because a firm charges a client an hourly fee for an employee that doesn't mean that that money is the the hourly salary of said employee.

[Prestidigitweeze]

Originally Posted by John F

IMO, the "ad homiem" attacks are a nice counter to the "Amazon is satan" defense.

My understanding was that pwalker objected to the trend toward creative overreaching by prosecutor-enabled judges, not the consequences for Apple in particular. In later posts, pwalker seems to be saying that the problem is not that Apple is particularly fair or good but that the precedent could lead to unfair actions against other companies like Google and Amazon. He even referenced the famous Martin Niemoller quote on that subject.

Walker's issue seems to be with Cotes and similarly inclined judges and prosecutors, not with which major company deserves fewer cheerleaders than the rest. To decide whether Walker has a point, I'd have to read more about Cotes' previous decisions and whether the recriminations are justified. It's a more interesting subject to me than whether or not Apple's corporate culture is particularly self-absorbed (which corporation -- excuse me, "person" -- isn't bloodlessly mercenary in the most literal sense?).