Featured Articles

Intel releases tiny 3G cell modem

Intel releases tiny 3G cell modem

Intel has released a 3G cellular modem with an integrated power amplifier that fits into a 300 mm2 footprint, claiming it…

More...
Braswell 14nm Atom slips to Q2 15

Braswell 14nm Atom slips to Q2 15

It's not all rosy in the house of Intel. It seems that upcoming Atom out-of-order cores might be giving this semiconductor…

More...
TSMC 16nm wafers coming in Q1 2015

TSMC 16nm wafers coming in Q1 2015

TSMC will start producing 16nm wafers in the first quarter of 2015. Sometime in the second quarter production should ramp up…

More...
Skylake-S LGA is 35W to 95W TDP part

Skylake-S LGA is 35W to 95W TDP part

Skylake-S is the ‘tock’ of the Haswell architecture and despite being delayed from the original plan, this desktop part is scheduled…

More...
Aerocool Dead Silence reviewed

Aerocool Dead Silence reviewed

Aerocool is well known for its gamer cases with aggressive styling. However, the Dead Silence chassis offers consumers a new choice,…

More...
Frontpage Slideshow | Copyright © 2006-2010 orks, a business unit of Nuevvo Webware Ltd.
Monday, 03 June 2013 09:33

Apple in court for anti-trust

Written by Nick Farrell



DoJ says it has “direct evidence”

Jobs’ Mob will go to trial over anti-trust allegations that it ran a pricing cartel with the big publishers over e-books. Apple insists it is innocent, despite the fact that its former CEO and messiah, Steve Jobs admitted it in his biography.

David Balto, a former policy director for the U.S. Federal Trade Commission has said that the case is important because it will have a knock on effect on the rest of e-commerce. Apple is going to trial alone after the five publishers, and potential Apple allies, agreed to eliminate prohibitions on wholesale discounts and to pay a collective $164 million to benefit consumers. As such it is going to be jolly hard for Apple to argue that it was entirely free of guilt. What is strange is that the DoJ is not even after dosh, but wants an order blocking Apple from engaging in similar conduct.

If Apple is found liable, it could still face damages in a separate trial by the state attorneys general and consumers pursuing class actions. Already a comment by the presiding judge Denise Cote at the final hearing before the trial, Apple may face an uphill battle. She has said that the government will be able to show at trial direct evidence that Apple knowingly participated in and facilitated a conspiracy to raise prices of e-books.

John Lopatka, a law professor at Pennsylvania State University told Reuters Apple may be calculating that future damages claims by states and class actions make it worth going to trial. The cunning plan might be that Apple may lose at the trial level, but we may well convince an appellate court the trial judge mischaracterised the evidence.

More here.

Nick Farrell

E-mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
blog comments powered by Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments