![]() |
#61 | ||
Grand Sorcerer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 7,881
Karma: 70186493
Join Date: Feb 2009
Device: Kobo Clara 2E
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#62 | |
Fledgling Demagogue
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 2,384
Karma: 31132263
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: White Plains
Device: Clara HD; Oasis 2; Aura HD; iPad Air; PRS-350; Galaxy S7.
|
Quote:
We've always got lionizers and vilifiers in threads like this. FJ Torres raised an interesting point about Random House making better legal decisions than Apple when facing the same sorts of charges; pwalker's counterargument seemed worth looking into simply because it introduced ideas beyond mere reactions to branding. It's easy to be annoyed by Apple's B&D tendencies toward users, but expressing my annoyance constantly would mean allowing myself to be caught in the same Clive Barker merry-go-round of neurotic ritual as Apple's most compulsive fan bottoms (and possibly power-addicted leadership tops). Then again, I've yet to meet an inhumanly prosperous CEO who didn't enjoy a bit of food-chain bondage. Last edited by Prestidigitweeze; 12-10-2013 at 12:01 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
Advert | |
|
![]() |
#63 |
Grand Sorcerer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 11,506
Karma: 37057604
Join Date: Jan 2008
Device: Pocketbook
|
Lawyers are known to bill more that 24 hours in a day.
This was litigated a few years ago. It was found legal. (Surprise! Nobody here but us lawyers...) |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#64 |
Grand Sorcerer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 5,761
Karma: 103362673
Join Date: Apr 2011
Device: pb360
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#65 | |
Wizard
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 4,896
Karma: 33602910
Join Date: Oct 2010
Device: PocketBook 903 & 360+
|
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
Advert | |
|
![]() |
#66 | ||
Fledgling Demagogue
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 2,384
Karma: 31132263
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: White Plains
Device: Clara HD; Oasis 2; Aura HD; iPad Air; PRS-350; Galaxy S7.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by Prestidigitweeze; 12-10-2013 at 05:05 PM. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#67 | |
Wizard
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 4,896
Karma: 33602910
Join Date: Oct 2010
Device: PocketBook 903 & 360+
|
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#68 | |
Grand Sorcerer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 7,196
Karma: 70314280
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Atlanta, GA
Device: iPad Pro, iPad mini, Kobo Aura, Amazon paperwhite, Sony PRS-T2
|
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#69 | |
Grand Sorcerer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 7,196
Karma: 70314280
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Atlanta, GA
Device: iPad Pro, iPad mini, Kobo Aura, Amazon paperwhite, Sony PRS-T2
|
Quote:
My bottom line issue is that I fail to see how a company can be accused of monopolistic practices when they aren't even in the market yet. In general, it appears that the prosecutor was unable to prove any of the normal things one most prove in a monopoly case, which is why the prosecutor introduced their novel legal theory that Apple should be held to a new standard. According to the various lawyers who critiqued Judge Cote, she is well known for picking winners and losers very early in a case and for slanting her actions towards whomever it is she favors. It was pointed out that Judge Cote apparently wrote most of her opinion before the case was actually heard. Most of this strikes me as unusual and dangerous. When I read that she took steps such as appointing a monitor that were described as unusual in a case like that, it confirms my impression that the whole situation is very troubling. When I read that the monitor wishes to "monitor" Apple's entire business rather than just the ebook potion, then I suspect that something far beyond the pale is going on here. Last edited by pwalker8; 12-10-2013 at 09:42 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#70 |
Wizard
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 4,896
Karma: 33602910
Join Date: Oct 2010
Device: PocketBook 903 & 360+
|
A trial can only be non-jury if the defendant waives the right to a jury trial. Apple chose to leave the decision entirely in the judge's hands.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#71 | |
Omnivorous
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 3,283
Karma: 27978909
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Rural NW Oregon
Device: Kindle Voyage, Kindle Fire HD, Kindle 3, KPW1
|
Quote:
Spin away... |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#72 | |
Fledgling Demagogue
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 2,384
Karma: 31132263
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: White Plains
Device: Clara HD; Oasis 2; Aura HD; iPad Air; PRS-350; Galaxy S7.
|
I prefer not to speculate about people's unstated motives, though I couldn't be certain you'd articulated exactly the argument I'd assumed you had.
There seem to be a lot of members here (and I'm not naming names) who retain someone's initial stated opinion and then choose to respond to all subsequent posts by that individual as if they were camouflaged attempts to advance an agenda stated or implied by the early opinion. Digressions are fine, but constant ad hominem seems a degradation of the momentum of any discussion. To respond to more reasonable posts as if they were interchangeable with a poster's initial misstep is to privilege enmity over speculative thought. We all make mistakes and some of them are emotional in nature. Everyone loses their cool occasionally (though some of us are more practiced at losing it off-camera). Quote:
FJ Torres makes the point that everyone but Apple chose to settle and avoid being targeted -- the idea being that Cote's decisions regarding punishment are unprecedented because no other corporation has been as stupid as Apple about refusing to settle in the face of such charges. Whether or not you think that argument is fair to Apple or relevant to the sweep of Cote's decisions, I find the idea difficult to accept -- not because Apple is necessarily in the right, but because corporations often do stupid things based on bad legal advice. If Apple is guilty of that, then I doubt they were the first to make that mistake. And if Apple isn't the first, then I'd have to study past cases in which companies chose not to settle and compare the actions and outcomes of those to the current example. Last edited by Prestidigitweeze; 12-11-2013 at 04:09 AM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#73 | |
Grand Sorcerer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 11,732
Karma: 128354696
Join Date: May 2009
Location: 26 kly from Sgr A*
Device: T100TA,PW2,PRS-T1,KT,FireHD 8.9,K2, PB360,BeBook One,Axim51v,TC1000
|
Quote:
2- If Apple's legal counsel told them a hub-and-spoke conspiracy was not a violation of antitrust they should have been fired on the spot. Possibly disbarred for incompetence. It is a textbook example of the kind of behavior antitrust was created to prevent. My suspicion is Jobs decided he was not going to settle a second antitrust lawsuit and everybody else has been stuck trying to follow through to protect their image. Hence the legally-weak, PR-focused filings. It's all about telling the faithful they are being victimized. It's their way of overturning the table, because neither the facts nor the law are on their side. 3- Companies have refused to settle antitrust cases before. None has done well. AT&T was destroyed until all that remains is the name. Microsoft was saddled with a monitor for years, billions of dollars of ambulance-chaser lawsuits and shakedowns. Conversely, when Apple quickly settled their first antitrust conspiracy case, it got buried so quickly most people don't even know it happened and think it's a bit of meaningless trivia instead of a context-setter for the current penalties trial. They should have not launched the conspiracy simultaneously, that was arrogant and stupid. Having done that, and having been caught, they should have settled. Even now, they have the chance to minimize the damages by accepting they crossed the line. Or at least pretend they do. That way they get to live and conspire another day. Antitrust is not a rap you can beat. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#74 |
Wizard
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 4,896
Karma: 33602910
Join Date: Oct 2010
Device: PocketBook 903 & 360+
|
I think that the basis for the different perspectives on this is the answer to the question: did Apple collude to fix ebook prices?
And the answers are: Yes. and Yes, but it shouldn't be illegal. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#75 | |
Grand Sorcerer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 11,732
Karma: 128354696
Join Date: May 2009
Location: 26 kly from Sgr A*
Device: T100TA,PW2,PRS-T1,KT,FireHD 8.9,K2, PB360,BeBook One,Axim51v,TC1000
|
Quote:
Especially since the legal system is only concerned with what is illegal at the time of trial. Perhaps if Apple had gone for a jury trial and played for jury nullification their tactics would make sense. But they didn't and judges don't often do nullification. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
DOJ publishes terms for settlement in Apple antitrust case | fjtorres | News | 58 | 08-26-2013 06:05 PM |
Apple, publishers offer EU e-book antitrust concessions | Top100EbooksRank | News | 8 | 09-03-2012 05:51 AM |
Kindle 3 gripes | Kumabjorn | Amazon Kindle | 143 | 09-09-2010 01:14 PM |
Apple might be facing an EU antitrust probe | kaas | News | 69 | 07-06-2010 04:18 PM |
Received IT and some gripes/whines | Fitzwaryn | Sony Reader | 5 | 10-09-2006 11:56 AM |