Jobs & Co. sued again; Mac web share up; iTunes K-12 launches

[AppleInsider]

Some of Apple's top executives, including Steve Jobs, have once again been accused of bad faith in backdating company shares. Simultaneously, Mac web share is nearing eight percent in one report, K-12 educational material has reached iTunes U, and Microsoft has shipped the second edition of Remote Desktop Connection for Mac.

Apple faces backdating scandal once again

Some of Apple's key senior officials are once again being taken to task for alleged stock manipulation.

Although Apple has successfully had its most high-profile case dismissed last year after a combination of internally-run and US Securities and Exchange Commission investigations, Apple shareholders Kenneth Mahoney and Martin Vogel late last week filed a new lawsuit that charges co-founder Steve Jobs, executives, and board members with damaging the company's share value through backdating, triggering a 14 percent drop in the company's stock value during 2006 that wiped out about $7 billion of Apple's worth on the market in just two weeks.

By knowingly dating stock options for executives to dates that weren't revealed to shareholders and falsifying records, the Apple officials were aware of fraud and what the manipulation could do to other shareholders, according to the claim.

While Apple ultimately adjusted its income to address the questionable actions, the move is said in the lawsuit to have given Jobs "instant paper profit" of more than $83.8 million in 2000, and $20.3 million in 2001, that wasn't properly accounted for.

In addition to Apple's CEO, the suit also brings further action against former chief finance officer Fred Anderson and general counsel Nancy Heinen, both of whom were directly blamed for the irregularities that prompted the earlier US government action.

The long-serving board members accused in the suit include Intuit chief William Campbell, J. Crew head Millard Drexler, Genentech's Arthur Levinson, and Harwinton Capital's Jerry York.

Mac web share seen nearing 8 percent

Continuning its upward climb, Mac share on the web is now at 7.94 percent, according to June 2008 results from Net Applications.

The group's over 40,000 tracked websites showed Mac OS X gaining a full tenth of a percentage point from month to month while Windows declined two tenths to 90.89 percent of all visitors. A significant gain by Linux from 0.68 to an even 0.8 percent of all web views is also credited with the shift.

iPhone web share remains flat at 0.16 but is still at an all-time high, and is the most successful mobile or console operating system in the rankings.

K-12 school material reaches iTunes U

Previously reserved just for college and university material, iTunes U is now opening its doors to content suitable for students between kindergarten and grade 12 as well as their parents and teachers.

Like the post-secondary material, the iTunes material for K-12 includes audio and video podcasts as well as text that gives students additional course material and adults more information about school programs.

The initial launch lineup includents content from school departments in Arizona, Florida, Maine, Michigan, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Utah.

Microsoft ships Remote Desktop Connection Client 2

Microsoft on Wednesday released Remote Desktop Connection Client 2, its long-awaited update to its utility for connecting to and controlling Windows PCs.

The new version is more Mac-like and includes several crucial additions, including the ability to reach multiple Windows systems at the same time, to create custom shortcuts for common actions, and to print content from the Windows system through the Mac's existing printer management interface.

The 7.7MB download is free and requires an Intel or PowerPC Mac running Mac OS X 10.2.8 or later with 128MB of RAM.

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[Alex3917]

Now, thanks to the magic of the Internet, we can all experience the amazing quality of the Florida public school system.

[fraklinc]

Apple is growing at a fast paste & some people aren't too happy about it

[SpamSandwich]

Where can one pick up that fast paste? Staples?

[fraklinc]

Originally Posted by SpamSandwich

Where can one pick up that fast paste? Staples?

At Toys R Us

[Oh Blah Dee Blah Dah]

RE: "Some of Apple's top executives, including Steve Jobs, have once again been accused of bad faith in backdating company shares."

=====================
"Old wine in new bottles."

This case was dismissed earlier. The plantiff lawyers are coming back again so that they can get a fee for their legal services.

I hope Apple fights them to the U.S. Supreme Court and the lawyers wind up with nothing, except a lot of lost legal time and high expenses.

[GMFlash]

Originally Posted by fraklinc

Apple is growing at a fast paste & some people aren't too happy about it

I think it's time for you to take some of those K-12 courses on iTunes U.

[bloggerblog]

Ouch!

[dontlookleft]

at the responses towards paste...

[ktappe]

Originally Posted by Oh Blah Dee Blah Dah

This case was dismissed earlier. The plantiff lawyers are coming back again so that they can get a fee for their legal services.

As much as I think what Apple's execs did was wrong, I have to agree--I see no differentiation (at least from this article) between the two allegations of wrongdoing. On the surface it seems they are the same transgression (or series thereof) and this is a violation of the double jeopardy rule. I'm sure the lawyers have stressed all types of nuances in their filing to make it appear as though there's another case, but with the same timeframe, same defendants, and same actions cited, I can't see this holding water.

[eldernorm]

Originally Posted by ktappe

As much as I think what Apple's execs did was wrong, I have to agree--I see no differentiation (at least from this article) between the two allegations of wrongdoing. On the surface it seems they are the same transgression (or series thereof) and this is a violation of the double jeopardy rule. I'm sure the lawyers have stressed all types of nuances in their filing to make it appear as though there's another case, but with the same timeframe, same defendants, and same actions cited, I can't see this holding water.

I totally agree. Its just greed. Jobs made money on paper then lost money on paper. It aint real until you cash in the paper. And the stock did not drop cause of the stock back dating. It dropped for other more nafarious reasons. :-(

en

[StinkyOldC]

another case for "Teflon" Steve?

[ncee]

Originally Posted by fraklinc

Apple is growing at a fast paste & some people aren't too happy about it

Pace … eye believe

[sequitur]

Originally Posted by fraklinc

Apple is growing at a fast paste & some people aren't too happy about it

I am not too happy about it. The larger the Apple share, the more Macs are going to be targeted by the 'evil ones'. Maybe he means Apple will be pasted by the 'evil ones'.

[MyopiaRocks]

Now I ain't sayin they's golddiggas;
But they ain't suin no brokes, brokes...

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by Oh Blah Dee Blah Dah

RE: "Some of Apple's top executives, including Steve Jobs, have once again been accused of bad faith in backdating company shares."

=====================
"Old wine in new bottles."

This case was dismissed earlier. The plantiff lawyers are coming back again so that they can get a fee for their legal services.

I hope Apple fights them to the U.S. Supreme Court and the lawyers wind up with nothing, except a lot of lost legal time and high expenses.

The thing is, the crew did act in bad faith, even if there was no apparent damage. Redating options without prior board approval is not too far from embezzlement in my mind. The crew picked new dates which the stock was the lowest for that month so that Apple will sell them stocks at a lower price, making it a higher opportunity cost on that stock for Apple.

I don't think any of these suits are going to do anything though. And a case such as this would never go to the Supreme Court, "fighting all the way to the Supreme Court" is a lame expression anyway, relatively speaking, almost nothing ever gets that far.

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by eldernorm

I totally agree. Its just greed. Jobs made money on paper then lost money on paper. It aint real until you cash in the paper. And the stock did not drop cause of the stock back dating. It dropped for other more nafarious reasons. :-(

Attempting to do something wrong still should carry a penalty, even if it did not work.

For example, should someone be let off "attempted burglary" charges because they didn't actually make out with anything?

[digitalclips]

I say this facetiously please don't quote the following out of context ... If most of the charges were dismissed but the stock went down due to the negative publicity, shouldn't this law suit filed over 'stock price loss' be aimed at the press who caused the negativity not those it was filed against?

[walueg]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

A significant gain by Linux from 0.68 to an even 0.8 percent of all web views is also credited with the shift.

An EVEN 0.8%. I'm not sure you can call any percentage even, but I can give you that. But 0.8 anything isn't even. It's 0.80 percent. I agree with the K-12 paste commenter. It's time to go back to school.

[quinney]

Originally Posted by ktappe

As much as I think what Apple's execs did was wrong, I have to agree--I see no differentiation (at least from this article) between the two allegations of wrongdoing. On the surface it seems they are the same transgression (or series thereof) and this is a violation of the double jeopardy rule.

I think the double jeopardy rule only applies to criminal charges. This is a
civil suit.

[Chris_CA]

Originally Posted by JeffDM

Attempting to do something wrong still should carry a penalty, even if it did not work.

For example, should someone be let off "attempted burglary" charges because they didn't actually make out with anything?

Since "Attempted burglary" is not a crime, one cannot be charged with it.
If they "attempted" it by going into a house/business & didn't actually take anything, they could be charged with breaking and entering and/or criminal trespass.

[elroth]

As I recall, the charges were dismissed because the original suit did not make the case that the stock price did in fact go down because of the backdating allegations. The judge dismissed the case, but said it could be refiled with new supporting evidence (the judge said the stock actually went up a lot in the months after the allegations).

So it looks like these lawyers are attempting to only look at the first two weeks after the charges, when the stock went down. I think they're grasping at straws here.

[fredghosn]

What more can I say.