Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Wins iPod Antitrust Lawsuit, Found Not Guilty of Harming Consumers
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The comments are rather astounding. How does sanity play into this? We're all of you privvy to all the details of this case?
I trust that the best decision was made based on the evidence presented. This is not different than the folks deciding whether an alleged murder is innocent or guilty based solely on what the media tells us.
This latter statement actually caused me to remember what a great job the movie "gone girl" did in showing, if nothing else, how the media and predispositions change and twist the oublic'so opinion.
I trust that the best decision was made based on the evidence presented. This is not different than the folks deciding whether an alleged murder is innocent or guilty based solely on what the media tells us.
This latter statement actually caused me to remember what a great job the movie "gone girl" did in showing, if nothing else, how the media and predispositions change and twist the oublic'so opinion.
Now can Apple turn around and sue RealNetworks for forcing me to download that stupid RealPlayer so many times back in the day?
Yes, they need to realize how much Apple hurt authors and consumers. Really, their policies only helped the publishers make more money and made ebooks a lot more expensive with the Authors seeing less money per copy of the ebook than they did before Apple came along.
There are no lawyer fees. Apple has its own legal department with a flotilla of lawyers that handle its lawsuits.
Now the lawyers, and their single client, should have to pay Apple's legal costs. That would be justice.
----------
That was a rather out of touch response. You think Apple's flotilla of lawyers work for free? Gee...
----------
That was a rather out of touch response. You think Apple's flotilla of lawyers work for free? Gee...
Common sense wins this round.
I can't wait to see the Apple haters from the other thread come in here and whine about how the judge and/or jury was paid off in some way.
I can't wait to see the Apple haters from the other thread come in here and whine about how the judge and/or jury was paid off in some way.
Are you the DOJ's spokesperson? The price of e-books basically stayed the same. All that happened was that Amazon finally faced some competition, and could no longer pull off the predatory pricing that would have crowded out all the the competition, essentially leaving the entire market to Amazon to price at whatever it wanted to. It's rare for the DOJ to take the side of the company with 90% market share.
This was the right ruling. The e-books case is more complicated. I don't think Apple is in the wrong but the publishers need to modernize and change practices. Sometimes book publishers are like the RIAA.
Apple's too clever and too big to lose. Anyone who's ever been to court representing a popular company like Apple knows it's verdicts are based on a plethora of considerations of which justice is rarely a factor.
In your opinion ...
Cool. The only thing Apple did with the iPod to kill competition was make it by far the best consumer music player ever. I love seeing these lawsuits in a way, like the ones against Uber by taxi companies.
Is this the same class action that had literally no plaintiffs because they couldnt find anyone who was interested in complaining and one of the lawyers wife was the last plaintiff but it turned out she never had an effected device?
[ ... posted edited ...] The recent verdict refers to the iTunes/iPod music case and is not related to ebooks.
(Edited to add: my apology if I misinterpreted your remarks. I just realized that you may have been responding to another post that simply made a reference to the ebooks case.)
Last edited:
Apple didn't really kill competition in the long run; it simply disrupted the old music distribution system with new technology. The initial decline in CD sales was a result of sales through iTunes, but more recently iTunes music sales are losing ground to a number of streaming music services - Beats Music, Google Play, Pandora, Rdio, Spotify. iTunes is not the dominant player in this space. Apple is now playing catch-up with its purchase of Beats Music. See post #25 above.Cool. The only thing Apple did with the iPod to kill competition was make it by far the best consumer music player ever. I love seeing these lawsuits in a way, like the ones against Uber by taxi companies.
Actually, that is one of the most damning aspect of this case. I'm too lazy to Google it, but in the original case's Powerpoint their is a slide that shows a very dramatic simultaneous jump in digital book prices. That's what will make this hard to overturn because there is no disputing that all at once prices went up. And the fact that they did so simultaneously and with Apple facilitating the move is unfortunately the definition of what Apple was found guilty of.
There are likely many technicalities that may impact this, but I'm sure there is no dispute that Apple coordinated a move that resulted in higher prices.
Edit: I got motivated for a second.
Last edited:
No chance. This is not even David vs Goliath. This was more like an "ant that David stepped on" vs Goliath