or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by EWTHeckman

  Like I said, I am not sure whether Apple actually acted in accord with the intent in that draft email. They must demonstrate that Apple acted in a way which created collusion among the publishers. Based on what has been reported here, I don't think the DOJ has demonstrated that beyond reasonable doubt (so far).   I personally would not call this draft a "smoking gun". A "smoking gun" settles an entire case beyond reasonable doubt. This is crucially important evidence...
Riiiight. Apparently you're unfamiliar with the concept of "plausible deniability".   What shows whether or not he followed though on that "line of action" is, by definition, his actions.
The problem is, it isn't "obvious" that he abandoned that line of thought, merely that he thought better about putting that thought in writing. If he acted consistent with that thought, even if he was never again dumb enough to write it down or be recorded saying it, then the DOJ can show that A) He had that thought, and B) He acted on that thought, which would prove their case.   Remember, the publishers did impose agency pricing on Amazon. The DOJ has now shown the...
What it shows is Steve Jobs' intent. If he wasn't thinking about getting the publishers to change their deals with Amazon, he would not have written it in the first place. That he never sent it shows that it occurred to him that putting that into writing was not such a good idea.
  They are not allowed to lie under oath in court. That is perjury and punishable. They're only permitted to lie during an investigation.
  Maps on iOS shows the area in 3D. It really makes it pretty easy to get the lay of the land.   Based on the shadows in the image under iOS, it looks like the only reason there's any light at all in that plaza is because of the weird triangular building. I could see the replacement of that with a square building (of any design) possibly putting the entire plaza permanently into shadow. (Note: This assessment is based entirely on the iOS Maps image which is static. I...
  That's what the agency model is. By itself, there's nothing illegal about it because there is room to negotiate the wholesale prices. But when combined with the "most favored nation" clause, they wound up fixing both the retail price and the wholesale price. That's why there was an issue.   Whether the publishers coordinated this, and whether Apple was involved are the questions.
  According to Tim Cook's statement, Apple does not do that.
  Back in the early 80's it was "Designed in America. Made in Ireland by Apple."   Why should Apple leave a country they've had a presence in for more than 30 years just because our government is greedy?
Each government sets its own tax rates to meet its own needs. Ireland's government is apparently frugal with the money it takes in. Why should they raise their rates—and thus, lose a competitive jobs advantage for their country—just because spendthrift governments aren't willing to control their spending? And why should an international company limit themselves to only those countries with exorbitant or even punitive tax rates?
New Posts  All Forums: