or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by elroth

Ummm... Google bought an already totally-developed YouTube, then futzed with it for years without making any money on it (it's still not clear that YouTube makes Google much money). I don't see innovation there by Google - all they did was try to add advertising to it. Of course they innovated in search - they improved it immensely. I don't use it (because of Google's privacy violations), but the vast majority of people do. Other than search, I just don't see it. Most...
Saying Google invented free email was a pretty good sign the post was sarcasm. Since when do people have to declare a post is sarcasm? If you're embarassed by missing it, accept the fact you got fooled. Big deal.
Are you really equating things with people? Refusing to serve somebody and kicking them out of your store is a bit different than not offering a certain product, don't you think? By your "logic", every store would have to offer every product in the world, so that every person could find every item he could possibly want. I'm offended by religious people - would you give me the right to refuse to serve them, and order them to leave my store? Here's something to think about:...
In its filing, Apple quotes a number of courts who concluded the same thing - that having lower prices is not a good measure of competition. Sometimes prices are too low (below cost), and stifle competition by preventing new sellers entering the market. Sound familiar, Amazon?
You're right. Apple is not one of the publishers. It's a totally different case than the publishers colluding (a horizontal relationship, which Apple was not a part of). Apple is asserting its innocence and its rights. It's unbelievable the people that so strongly declare Apple guilty, when their appeal hasn't been heard. Lots of interesting arguments of law in today's filing.
1. Her pre-trial opinion was way too strong - she didn't say "the gov't. seems to have a strong case," or something like that - she said she believed the government will show Apple engaged in a conspiracy. Before any evidence was introduced, before any opening arguments, before she heard anything from Apple. That's not really appropriate.2. Cote and Bromwich worked together for years, and she gave him a glowing recommendation to the DOJ for a previous job. All news reports...
If you would actually read the court's decision, and Apple's filing today, you would find that the court did indeed rule that "the record is equivocal on whether Apple itself desired higher e-book prices than those offered at Amazon."  In case you still don't understand, that means the judge said herself (in her ruling) that it hasn't been shown that Apple desired higher prices. Yet she convicted Apple anyway. She also said in her ruling that the iPad encouraged innovation...
That's exactly the example I was going to use - I better change the password in my brain. I'm on the other side, though: If my opinion is that "The Earth is flat", then that opinion is contrary to fact, and is false. The statement "I believe the Earth is flat" is still true, of course, but that's a statement ABOUT my opinion, not the opinion itself.  By the way, did anyone see the episode of "The Good Wife" where the judge required all the lawyers to end their...
Maybe they could submit it to the San Francisco Design Review Board and get some suggestions for modifications. Like a fountain in the back or something.
One ring to rule them all.
New Posts  All Forums: