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.
Tuesday, 14 January 2014 12:37

Apple told to obey the law

Written by Nick Farrell



Stop being an iArse

Jobs’ Mob has been told that ignoring a court order because it does not feel it lost the case is not a good way to proceed through life. Apple has been seething that a court official has been daring to do his job and telling it how to avoid being an evil leader of a cartel designed to fleece its customers. The monitor Michael Bromwich had complained that Apple was refusing to meet with him and was ignoring his requests for information.

Jobs’ Mob felt that meant he was biased. Apparently biased means not doing what Apple told him. Apple’s excuse, the monitor said, was that executives were so hacked off that they lost the case they were too upset to talk to him. Proof that the company still believes in its reality distortion field even when a court tells it otherwise happened last week when Apple demanded that the court remove an official who was supposed to tell Apple how to avoid breaking the law. In legal terms this is the equivalent of a gangster being given probation but refusing to do what his probation officer tells him.

At a hearing, U.S. District Judge Denise Cote in Manhattan denied Apple's request to stay an order requiring an external compliance monitor pending the company's appeal. She wanted the monitorship to succeed for Apple. She said that there was there was "nothing improper" about a declaration filed by a lawyer chosen to serve as monitor, Michael Bromwich, that became the basis of Apple seeking his disqualification.

Theodore Boutrous, a lawyer for Apple, said Apple would appeal, clearly still not getting the message.

Apple also complained about his proposed hourly fee rate of $1,100, which Apple said gave him an incentive to run, "as broad and intrusive investigation as possible." Of course it did not tell the court how much its own lawyers are charging for appeal after appeal just because the outfit cannot understand that it broke the law.

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