or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › WSJ blasts Apple e-books antitrust judge in scathing editorial
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

WSJ blasts Apple e-books antitrust judge in scathing editorial

post #1 of 68
Thread Starter 
A new opinion piece lambasts Judge Denise Cote, the federal judge in charge of the Justice Department's antitrust suit against Apple, for being "abusive" and "shredding the separation of constitutional powers" by appointing and granting broad authority to antitrust monitor Michael Bromwich.

Bromwich
Michael Bromwich | Source: ZUMA Press via mnn.com


The Wall Street Journal's harsh critique mirrors many of the grievances outlined by Apple in the iPhone maker's complaint to the court last week, taking issue with Bromwich's fees --?which exceeded $100,000 in just his first two weeks --?and accusing Cote of granting Bromwich "carte blanche to act as the inquisitor of all things Cupertino."

Judge Cote "essentially ruled before hearing the evidence" against Apple and her appointment of an external monitor at all, let alone Bromwich, whom the Journal calls "her friend," is viewed by the paper as a "flatly unconstitutional" violation of her mandate in the case.

The "judicial duty" under the Constitution's Article III vests judges with the power to resolve "cases and controversies." Prosecutors enforce laws, conduct investigations and uncover evidence. Judges aren't supposed to appoint their own agents to annex such activities reserved for the executive branch. Mr. Bromwich has rewritten his job description to investigate Apple all over again, not simply monitor if Apple is abiding by the terms of the court judgment while it appeals the case.



The Journal continues to rake Bromwich over the coals, painting him as a "political fixer" linked to the investigations of the BP Horizon deepwater oil spill and the Reagan administration's Iran-Contra affair. Bromwich's service as the Justice Department's inspector general is also called into question, with the revelation that Judge Cote herself penned an endorsement for Bromwich that helped get the prosecutor confirmed by the Senate despite concerns about conflicts of interest.

Judge Cote's "condominium with Mr. Bromwich is offensive to the rule of law and a disgrace to the judiciary," the paper asserts in a final, biting flourish.

Not ordinarily in such an incendiary mood, the Journal may be coming to the aid of its News Corp. stablemate and Apple's fellow antitrust defendant, publisher HarperCollins, which Fortune's Philip Elmer-Dewitt points out was originally averse to joining with Apple and only did so after a personal appeal from Apple's then-CEO Steve Jobs to News Corp. founder Rupert Murdoch.
post #2 of 68
It's a money grab. I'd love someone working for the US gov to go to jail over this.
Edited by Ireland - 12/6/13 at 8:42am
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #3 of 68
Wow! This is heating up. One has to wonder where the Apple hate came from in the first place?
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
post #4 of 68
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post
Wow! This is heating up. One has to wonder where the Apple hate came from in the first place?

 

The Axis of Don’t Be Evil, comprised of Redmont, WA, Mountain View, CA, and the entirety of SK.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #5 of 68
The judge's statement BEFORE the trial that she would find Apple guilty should have been enough to have her removed from that case. I'm amazed it was allowed to go this far. The woman hates Apple for some reason.
post #6 of 68
Our court systems have always been somewhat corrupt. However, this is an in-your-face judicial corruption. If this judge get's fired, my faith in America's judicial system will be somewhat restored, but I have a feeling that, if anything, she'll get a slap on the wrist.
bb
Reply
bb
Reply
post #7 of 68
Huh... I don't exactly trust the editorial page of the WSJ, but this situation does seem pretty odd. Ultimately this will not be resolved by editorials, but by a legal process. If this judge has broken the law or acted improperly, she made a big mistake doing it against Apple -- Apple has the resources to pursue this process as far as it needs to go.

The real shame of our legal system is that it heavily favors those with the deepest pockets who can afford to fund endless litigation. If this judge had picked on a financially weaker company or person, she would probably get away with it.
post #8 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

One has to wonder where the Apple hate came from in the first place?


Where did the Apple hate come from? Check out the game tape. The hate started in 1976.

post #9 of 68

DOJ probably thought since Apple didn't bend over, let's make them pay...  Apple can afford it.

post #10 of 68

Kudos to the Wall Street Journal. I disagree with their editorials and op-eds a lot, but on some issues, such as antitrust, preservation of genuine competition, and holding the government/judiciary accountable, they are second to none.

 

The op-ed and editorial pages of papers like the NYT are just way too beholden to the corrupt and power-grabbing left.*

 

 

*I am not, by any stretch, implying that all of the Left is either corrupt or power-grabbing -- indeed, most of it is not; simply pointing out to whom the NYT is beholden.

post #11 of 68
Yeah. I read about this in Fortune, which is the source of this mild rewording.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #12 of 68

Here's hoping Judge Cote will explain her position because this is some pretty devastating accusations even if it's from the WSJ rag.

 

It isn't just her behaviour, it's also the DoJ.  Of all the price fixing going on out there, LIBOR, EURBOR, ISDAfix, foreign currency exchange, price of oil, price of gold, price of sliver, price of food, the DoJ decided to put all it's efforts at deal with pricing fixing in ... ebooks.

 

The elites from top to bottom are losing credibility and pretty soon someone is going to finally say, "you know what, f**k 'em.  They're not doing their jobs so I'll just do it for them."  The quiet judicial release of the three GE finance executives over Thanksgiving is yet another example.

post #13 of 68
At least two lawyers at Goodwin Proctor LLP work on Samsung cases. Karen A. Spindler the join the firm earlier this year. She counseled Samsung in connection with patent acquisitions and complex strategic licensing transactions.

Thomas Scott mitigated the Semiconductor Energy Laboratories Corporation versus Samsung Electronics Corporation in 1998.

Seeing that Michael Bromwich has a connection with Goodwin Proctor LLP which has a connection with Samsung is not good.

To add fuel, Michael has had a long-term friendship with Judge Cote who initially authorized Michael to... speak to her without Apple's lawyers present nor a transcript of what was spoken being required, interview any or all Apple employees without legal representation, start his job before the 90-day period she set to give Apple the chance to complete its new policy document, publish all Apple interviews whenever he wanted definitely starts to seem like collusion against Apple going on.

And to think the US government is the ring master of all of the underhandedness. Could Snowden have been right to do what he did to expose the spying tactics of the government?

What does the government want from Apple that Apple has chosen not to provide?
post #14 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by cherrypop View Post


Where did the Apple hate come from? Check out the game tape. The hate started in 1976.

I was specifically referring to this case. I owned an Apple dealership from 1978 I know the history thanks.
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
Enjoying the new Mac Pro ... it's smokin'
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini.
Reply
post #15 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

Yeah. I read about this in Fortune, which is the source of this mild rewording.

 

Holy crap! You serious?

Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #16 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Wow! This is heating up. One has to wonder where the Apple hate came from in the first place?

 

I think it has more to do with this Bromwich character billing Apple $1100.00/hr for his “monitoring” services. I believe his first bill was for $176,000.00. For what? Always follow the money. Bromwich is the judge’s “friend” and he is given this job. Not hate, politics and greed.
post #17 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by leavingthebigG View Post

What does the government want from Apple that Apple has chosen not to provide?

 

The US intelligence complex wants an unfettered backdoor in Apple's rock-solid ecosystem.

 

I have tried to outline this in a previous post last week or so.

post #18 of 68

I read it through and had to check twice (I was on my 5s) that is really WAS the WSJ. Pretty take no prisoners scathing.

 

Ripped both the judge and the monitor big time. The zero antitrust experience and having to hire a "helper" law firm to back up his ignorance at the same rate he's billing was pitiful.

post #19 of 68

This whole case truly makes my head spin. Going to the WSJ and reading the comment section there is mostly an exercise in the vast spectrum of political spin doctoring leaning heavily toward the side of 'well, all those SV democrats supported Obama so I hope they finally learn but I doubt it' kind of thing. At least one very serious commenter believes that Bromwich is also empowered to determine why Apples hardware 'costs so much more than the market average'.

 

I find the close relationship between the judge and the inquisitor curious and to me it smacks of malfeasance, at least I hope that qualifies as malfeasance … This Bromwich is obviously super well-connected, not just with the judge. I hope this editorial and more like it can bring more of a spotlight to this judicially sanctioned harassment. 

post #20 of 68
Our judges have failed us (Americans) on a national level. They have all too often let their personal emotions cloud their judgement. We see it more and more. Unfortunately for Apple, they are seeing it first hand. "With great power comes great responsibility..."
post #21 of 68
Michael Bromwich looks like a stereotypical caricature from anti-Semitic cartoon.
post #22 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Wow! This is heating up. One has to wonder where the Apple hate came from in the first place?

Apple being clever and using loop-holes in the tax code*** comes to mind.

*** Which is perfectly legal and Apple's responsibility to it's shareholders to utilize to the fullest... just so no one thinks I'm complaining here.

I also wouldn't put it past the government to be absolutely flummoxed how to get Apple to kneel to their ways regarding data mining when and how they wish. Not only the touch-security on current iPhones being a "stroke" of genius locking it away in an encrypted chip, but face recognition patents of late tell me that Apple has a leg up... no... 2 legs up on the NSA to date.

Adding pain to misery, the Apple executive team being led by the gentlemanly charms and cunning Tim Cook, is screwing with the governments "take no prisoners" and "we'll do what we damn well want to" guys in government.

So yeah.... I think there's a whole lotta hot lava hate oozing from more than one department that would like to "take 'em down", so to speak.
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
post #23 of 68
The American legal system is a joke! But what should we expect with a U.S. government run by Bozos and clowns?
post #24 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

*I am not, by any stretch, implying that all of the Left is either corrupt or power-grabbing -- indeed, most of it is not; simply pointing out to whom the NYT is beholden.

Other words come to mind to describe the rest of them, self serving, narrow minded, gullible, deluded, luddites and dreamers

post #25 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post

Huh... I don't exactly trust the editorial page of the WSJ, but this situation does seem pretty odd. Ultimately this will not be resolved by editorials, but by a legal process. If this judge has broken the law or acted improperly, she made a big mistake doing it against Apple -- Apple has the resources to pursue this process as far as it needs to go.

The real shame of our legal system is that it heavily favors those with the deepest pockets who can afford to fund endless litigation. If this judge had picked on a financially weaker company or person, she would probably get away with it.

So far she's gotten away with it, so being financially strong hasn't helped.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #26 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ Web View Post

The American legal system is a joke! But what should we expect with a U.S. government run by Bozos and clowns?

Don't you mean Bezos? lol.gif
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #27 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by cfabre View Post

The US intelligence complex wants an unfettered backdoor in Apple's rock-solid ecosystem.

I have tried to outline this in a previous post last week or so.

Apple should just buy a MLB team and then they'll be exempt from antitrust laws.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #28 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by ggf View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

*I am not, by any stretch, implying that all of the Left is either corrupt or power-grabbing -- indeed, most of it is not; simply pointing out to whom the NYT is beholden.

Other words come to mind to describe the rest of them, self serving, narrow minded, gullible, deluded, luddites and dreamers

And the Right, then.....?

post #29 of 68

For a Judge to err is human, that's why there are appeals.

However, if an investigation were to reveal that she colluded with Michael Bromwich for a money grab then she would be in a lot of trouble.

 

This whole thing including the DOJ and Amazon's involvement stinks to high heavens.

post #30 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc View Post

Apple being clever and using loop-holes in the tax code*** comes to mind.

Companies like Amazon and Google don't take advantage of tax loopholes!?

 

Although it is (slowly) changing, Amazon's business model was quite substantially founded on arbitraging sales taxes across state lines.

post #31 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Wow! This is heating up. One has to wonder where the Apple hate came from in the first place?

 

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/07/apple-finds-dc-is-tough-without-friends-94948.html

 

“Everybody gets a shot at being a fair-haired boy and that can keep the regulators away for a while. But nobody stays favored forever. That’s why you need friends.”
 

post #32 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post
 

And the Right, then.....?

touché

It is always easier to see the faults in others than to see your own

post #33 of 68

As I've written before, Bromwich should be permitted to do exactly one thing:   he should automatically be sent a copy of any proposed contract between Apple and any eBooks publisher to see what the pricing and royalty model is.    That's it.   He doesn't need to reside at Apple and he doesn't need to interview anybody (unless he sees a clause in the contract that violates the Agreement).    And he doesn't need a staff.   There probably aren't that many contracts in which Apple doesn't use the same boilerplate as their other such contracts.     And he should be paid reasonably as a lawyer should be paid, but that should certainly not be $100K a week.

 

I'll do it for $5K a week and laugh all the way to the bank.   I'm sure there are law firms who would do it for $1K a week: they'd just assign it to some law clerk.    

 

This sounds to me like the schemes in which a lawyer assigns a friend to manage an estate and the estate manager winds up stealing half the estate via over-charging for management fees. 

 

Apple should reject any request other than reviewing a proposed contract.   If Bromwich accuses them of violating the Agreement, he'd probably be doing Apple a favor by dragging them back into court, especially if any kind of appeal can go before a different judge. 

post #34 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

Holy crap! You serious?

The Fortune article is a link in the story, but yes, that is my impression, because I just happened to read the Fortune article right before reading this one. However, since they cited it and the original WSJ piece, I am not implying there's anything "wrong" with that. That's the nature of the site: mostly repackaging original content from other sources. Sort of like an Apple news/rumor aggregator, with festive Google Ads sprinkled on top.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #35 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by battiato1981 View Post

This whole case truly makes my head spin. Going to the WSJ and reading the comment section there is mostly an exercise in the vast spectrum of political spin doctoring leaning heavily toward the side of 'well, all those SV democrats supported Obama so I hope they finally learn but I doubt it' kind of thing. At least one very serious commenter believes that Bromwich is also empowered to determine why Apples hardware 'costs so much more than the market average'.

I find the close relationship between the judge and the inquisitor curious and to me it smacks of malfeasance, at least I hope that qualifies as malfeasance … This Bromwich is obviously super well-connected, not just with the judge. I hope this editorial and more like it can bring more of a spotlight to this judicially sanctioned harassment. 

This has nothing to do with Obama or Holder or any public aspect of our government. There is a shadow government running things, has been for many years. (Not directing this at you, battiato 1981)

It's naive to think otherwise. Y'all had better check out the post that cfabre links to above at post 17. You are wasting your energy on strawmen.

Safari crahed twice on the making and editing of this post. Using iOS 7.
Edited by Flaneur - 12/6/13 at 11:23am
post #36 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by leavingthebigG View Post

...
What does the government want from Apple that Apple has chosen not to provide?

 

Access to iMessage and all your iCloud data.

post #37 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by icoco3 View Post
 

 

Access to iMessage and all your iCloud data.

 

They can just get the data content from AT&T, Verizon and the like.

 

I think it's a shakedown for money and potentially people in the DoJ bureaucracy hoping that Apple will see the light and offer some of these DoJ people cushy jobs so Apple no longer runs afoul of the DoJ in the future.  To bring in some "DoJ expertise" to Cupertino.  We sort of see that already when it comes to what happens to most IRS agents.

post #38 of 68
Originally Posted by patrickwalker View Post

They can just get the data content from AT&T, Verizon and the like.

 

And just sit on it because it’s encrypted. Yeah, that’s what they want¡

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #39 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

And just sit on it because it’s encrypted. Yeah, that’s what they want¡

 

Exactly. They want the keys because they can't hot wire the car.

post #40 of 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Wow! This is heating up. One has to wonder where the Apple hate came from in the first place?

 

From a small group of people who had to pay a couple of bucks more for some of the eBooks they wanted to buy.

 

That and Bezo's boathouse.

 

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › WSJ blasts Apple e-books antitrust judge in scathing editorial