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.
Former iTunes Engineer Claims Apple Aimed to Block '100% of Non-iTunes Clients'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
"Former iTunes Engineer Claims Apple Aimed to Block '100% of Non-iTunes Clients"
No... He "testified" under questioning from class action attorney.
No... He "testified" under questioning from class action attorney.
If Apple loses the case, the class action attorneys make six figures, while the so called "Plaintiffs" get two figures if they're lucky...
What do you call it when you chain 100 lawyers together and drop them in the ocean?... Answer... A good start.
For the record, this is a joke, I don't actually support drowning anyone.
What do you call it when you chain 100 lawyers together and drop them in the ocean?... Answer... A good start.
For the record, this is a joke, I don't actually support drowning anyone.
Agree it seems so stupid and unbelievable it even got to court.
----------
If Apple loses the case, the class action attorneys make six figures, while the so called "Plaintiffs" get two figures if they're lucky...
What do you call it when you chain 100 lawyers together and drop them in the ocean?... Answer... A good start.
For the record, this is a joke, I don't actually support drowning anyone.
CIA does and I support them.
This case is about protecting consumers.
If you bought music for the original iPod your decision to buy the iPod 2 or another music device should be based on the merits of those respective products and not based on the fact that your purchased music is only compatible with Apple products. The fact that Apple's products are superior is irrelevant.
If you bought music for the original iPod your decision to buy the iPod 2 or another music device should be based on the merits of those respective products and not based on the fact that your purchased music is only compatible with Apple products. The fact that Apple's products are superior is irrelevant.
How about if Microsoft only allowed Internet Explorer to work with Windows, so if you did not like it, then don't buy Windows.
It's Microsofts product, so they can do what they like with it.....
Yes?
Wow, nice jack-assy and baseless reply. What is it exactly about what he stated that's so bad? Seemed straight-forward to me.
Apple seems to have changed its spots
We have an app in the Mac App Store (Dapper) that will copy iTunes playlists and music to high resolution Digital Audio Players from folks like FiiO, Astell and Kern, iBasso etc.
For us to do this, we had to be approved by Apple to even exist in the Store, so it looks like while Apple isn't natively supporting 3rd party players in iTunes today, (and doesn't have a super-duper API to access iTunes), they're not cutting off access to apps that do.
More info on our app here
We have an app in the Mac App Store (Dapper) that will copy iTunes playlists and music to high resolution Digital Audio Players from folks like FiiO, Astell and Kern, iBasso etc.
For us to do this, we had to be approved by Apple to even exist in the Store, so it looks like while Apple isn't natively supporting 3rd party players in iTunes today, (and doesn't have a super-duper API to access iTunes), they're not cutting off access to apps that do.
More info on our app here
You don't get it. It's a class action lawsuit. You could actually receive money if you meet the criteria. Apple was selling iPods like flapjacks during this period. These customers are all potentially plaintiff's. For example I got a email from Google saying that I could potentially get a refund for in app purchases due to a settlement. Yes I made in app purchases but it was all me.
Don't take these lawsuits personal.
So I can get 45 cents from Apple because I couldn't use a crappy music store I never was going to use? That's nice. Never mind during that time frame I was in fact using a third party music store with iTunes - it was called ripping CDs to the hard drive. I'd rather Apple put that money into their business today, or distribute it to shareholders.
Note that I am not opposed to class action lawsuits in principle - they are a good way to get a company to change its behavior. But the thing is that the facts in this case are simply irrelevant today. The music industry has moved beyond DRM, thanks in large part to Apple. This is just a shakedown.
He's a chronic Apple-hater. People like that put so much mental energy in spewing their hatred of Apple that it takes a huge toll on them when somebody says that there might be one time in Apple's history where something they did wasn't 100% wrong.
So why are Microsoft forced by law to offer you the choice of other browsers for use in Windows if it's their product?
If you say Apple can do what they like as it's their product and if you don't like Apple's rules then don't buy it.
Then the same can Apply to Microsoft, yes ?
I haven't been following this too closely, but it sure sounds like a lawyer driven lawsuit. You don't run out of plaintiffs if you have a legitimate complaint...
This lawsuit is so ridiculously stupid. What's next? ...Apple getting sued because you can't install or run a Microsoft Windows-based program on a Mac (i.e. Microsoft Office)? People want to sue for anything these days just get have a chance at striking it rich. They don't care about anything except money.
Apples first-mover advantage
So when are people going to just accept the fact that Apple has had quite a few first mover advantages and that they simply had to protect their inventions? Partly because the navel-gazing music industry demanded DRM but also because they did not want all the lemmings to follow suit, steal and copy their inventions.... Or should I sue Apple because I THOUGHT of an online music store a few years before iTunes opened...? I THOUGHT about it, but did not have the slightest chance in hell, because I was not loaded with money and important enough to get the attention of the music industry. Apple had all the right cards, and moved before anyone else knew what was happening... It has happened since, and every time it is so appalling to see when plaintiffs try to monetize their laziness, arrogance and stupidity!
So when are people going to just accept the fact that Apple has had quite a few first mover advantages and that they simply had to protect their inventions? Partly because the navel-gazing music industry demanded DRM but also because they did not want all the lemmings to follow suit, steal and copy their inventions.... Or should I sue Apple because I THOUGHT of an online music store a few years before iTunes opened...? I THOUGHT about it, but did not have the slightest chance in hell, because I was not loaded with money and important enough to get the attention of the music industry. Apple had all the right cards, and moved before anyone else knew what was happening... It has happened since, and every time it is so appalling to see when plaintiffs try to monetize their laziness, arrogance and stupidity!