Heres a company that made all of my songs that freely floated into my iPod legitimate via iTunes match. So how do I as an iPod owner value this.....with great respect, thanks Apple.
This sham is a BS money grab, no more no less.
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.
iPod Lawsuit Loses Last Plaintiff as Judge Discusses Halt Amid Search for Replacements
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Heres a company that made all of my songs that freely floated into my iPod legitimate via iTunes match. So how do I as an iPod owner value this.....with great respect, thanks Apple.
This sham is a BS money grab, no more no less.
Nope, not the crux of the case at all. The laws in California allow consumers to collect damages from companies that are found to have violated antitrust laws, which are concerned entirely with competitors, not consumers. A subtle but crucial distinction that no doubt totally escapes you.
You still do not understand law at all.
In a civil suit there are two parties. The plaintiffs are the party suing. To claim damages (what they are suing for) you have to prove you are harmed. If the court says that you are harmed then you are to be made whole by receiving damages. In this case one of the aspects that the plaintiffs are alleging is that they were harmed by Apple breaking antitrust laws. If Apple is found guilty as to breaking antitrust laws the consumers will receive damages because they were the one's hurt. The only possible way to receive damages is to show "you were hurt". It is very possible in this case that the courts could find that Apple did not break antitrust law, BUT that the consumers were still damaged and they could still receive damages. This is not an antitrust/DOJ suit. This is a civil suit where a "hurt" party wants to be made whole by the company that hurt them.
Every single lawyer and 1st year law student is laughing at your understanding of law right now.
You are extremely clueless and I really hope that you don't give legal advice to people you know.
And no, Federal law states that consumers can collect damages from companies that hurt them and they can collect damages from companies who violate state's laws (any state's laws) where it is proved that by violating those laws the consumers have been hurt. One of the ways consumers can be damaged is by companies violating antitrust laws. THIS IS A FEDERAL CASE, NOT A STATE ONE.
Last edited:
Ah well
This is what you get when you don't actively pursue a case for nearly a decade. I figured that most of the plaintiffs either started buying more Apple stuff and accepted Apple's walled garden profit model, or moved on to something else. This was sheer stupidity on behalf of the suing lawyers.
Still, Apple should be held accountable for their business tactics with the original iPod. While this lawsuit may be without merit, Apple got away with pretty much the same kind of anti-competitive, antitrust practices Microsoft and Google have been slammed with over the years. Some how a double standard is applied to Apple every time they do some particularly devious corporate scheming that screws their customers, except that it seems most customers liked getting screwed by Apple as this site is proof of. Just take my credit card Apple and reduce my consumer rights and freedoms!
Perhaps the EU will rise up and file their inevitable lawsuits against Apple, once their backlog of ridiculous anti-American corporate lawsuits is cleared up a bit.
This is what you get when you don't actively pursue a case for nearly a decade. I figured that most of the plaintiffs either started buying more Apple stuff and accepted Apple's walled garden profit model, or moved on to something else. This was sheer stupidity on behalf of the suing lawyers.
Still, Apple should be held accountable for their business tactics with the original iPod. While this lawsuit may be without merit, Apple got away with pretty much the same kind of anti-competitive, antitrust practices Microsoft and Google have been slammed with over the years. Some how a double standard is applied to Apple every time they do some particularly devious corporate scheming that screws their customers, except that it seems most customers liked getting screwed by Apple as this site is proof of. Just take my credit card Apple and reduce my consumer rights and freedoms!
Perhaps the EU will rise up and file their inevitable lawsuits against Apple, once their backlog of ridiculous anti-American corporate lawsuits is cleared up a bit.
No, it is you who don't understand, not even the basics. This IS an antitrust law suit right on the very face of it, and you need only READ IT to discover this. The full and complete basis of consumers claiming damages in the case under California law is proving antitrust law violations. Everything in the actual complaint flows from this, which again, you might know if you actually read it. There is absolutely no way damages can be assessed against Apple if the antitrust law violations are not proven. None. Zero. Zilch. Nada.
From the complaint:
And so on. You are, once again, completely wrong.
Last edited:
You think what you want. We can all continue to laugh that you think this is not a lawsuit about Apple hurting (harming) customers. I have already read the complaint and pointed out numerous mistakes you have made.
This is BS case. You buy an iPod from Apple you use iTunes only ,that's it. If you don't want to use iTunes, buy another MP3 device.
Good god, this is BS.
Good god, this is BS.
