Originally Posted by EWTHeckman
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 other end of the chain, that Steve Jobs was thinking about trying to get that to happen. Now the question is, did he/Apple act to make that happen? I don't know. If they can prove intent (they have), action (unknown), and results (obvious), then they will have proven illegal collusion. If they can't prove that Steve/Apple acted to make his thought into reality, then they should not win.
No, they haven't shown that he was, "thinking about trying to get that to happen." What they've actually shown is that certain thoughts occurred to him which he did not follow through on. Not sending that email, and sending an entirely different email, shows the intent not to follow that line of action. Now the question is, does the DoJ have any real evidence, is the judge interested in hearing any evidence, or is this a kangaroo court?
And, what the publishers did isn't necessarily relevant. In fact, even if we assume Apple was interested in what the DoJ asserts and assume the publishers "imposed" agency pricing on Amazon as part of a coordinated effort among themselves, the 2 ends of the "chain" aren't connected. Even if Apple manipulated them into "imposing" agency pricing on Amazon, the 2 ends of the "chain" aren't connected. Because none of that shows a conspiracy amongst them including Apple.
The fact is that this entire case is a just so tale. The DoJ has nothing but smoke and mirrors here, and the court has rendered judgement before hearing the evidence, and even refuses to hear it, or to apply logic. The fact is that the DoJ has nothing that resembles evidence of what they allege. All they have evidence of is that SJ briefly entertained certain thoughts but abandoned them. The idea that he didn't send the email because, "he thought better about putting that thought in writing," is just that, an idea, and unless they have some evidence to support that notion, then they are just speculating on what he might have been thinking when he wrote an email he never sent.
The entire case is based on nothing but speculation, on fanciful thinking by the government's lawyers, not on evidence. Showing 2 ends of a chain doesn't prove they are or ever were part of the same chain, and in this case, one of the "ends" appears to be nothing more than a reflection of the other.
Edited by anonymouse - 6/13/13 at 6:40am