or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Antitrust monitor rebuts Apple accusations of 'unconstitutional' investigation
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Antitrust monitor rebuts Apple accusations of 'unconstitutional' investigation

post #1 of 55
Thread Starter 
Court-appointed antitrust monitor Michael Bromwich filed a declaration on Monday saying Apple has been very uncooperative compared to his past monitorships, rebuking the company's actions thus far and denying claims of "a broad and amorphous inquisition."

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


In an 11-page document filed with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, Bromwich, who is tasked with overseeing Apple's e-book pricing activities as a result of a Department of Justice price-fixing trial, detailed his experience with Apple's legal team, executives, board members and even the public.

Bromwich starts out with a brief background on his appointment to the Apple case, including previous experience in three separate corporate and government monitoring assignments. He points to these repeatedly throughout the declaration, which was filed along with numerous emails from Apple's representation and senior executives.

Describing the preceding two months, Bromwich offers multiple examples of what he considers to be an unwillingness on Apple's part to facilitate a smooth operation.

Backed up with emails from Apple's senior director for competition law and policy Kyle Andeer, the monitor notes multiple instances in which repeated interview requests with board members and senior executives were rebuffed. Bromwich said he has "never waited as long as a month" for such meetings.

According to Bromwich, Andeer said Apple was concerned with allowing interviews as executives were upset over the court's ruling and would "never get over the case," expressing that the monitor and his team would see that "a lot of anger" still existed within the company.

So far, Apple has granted interviews with 11 people for a combined total of 13 hours. Of the interviewees, only one was a requested board member, while seven were lawyers rather than "business people." In addition, Bromwich questions Apple's insistence on conducting interviews at a satellite location in Sunnyvale, Calif., and not the company's Cupertino headquarters.
"This is far less access than I have ever received during a comparable period of time in the three other monitorships I have conducted." - Michael Bromwich"This is far less access than I have ever received during a comparable period of time in the three other monitorships I have conducted," Bromwich writes.

Further, the monitor complains that requested materials have not been provided in a timely or satisfactory manner. Apple's general counsel and senior vice president of legal and government affairs Bruce Sewell described the task as calling for "voluminous historical documents," of which 303 pages have been provided. Bromwich said the production is an incomplete response to his request.

Bromwich also profiled public blowback which came in the form of profane emails after Apple called the monitor's handling of the situation "unconstitutional," labeling it as a "broad and amorphous inquisition."

Bromwich's filing comes on the same day as plaintiffs' filed their opposition to Apple's motion to stay the investigation pending appeal of U.S. District Court Judge Denise Cote's ruling. In that filing, the DOJ and states attorneys general move to deny the stay citing public interest in preventing further antitrust violations that could be conducted by an unmonitored Apple.

Apple has been at odds with Bromwich since the former Justice Department Inspector General's assignment, saying the monitor is overstepping his bounds by making unreasonable requests while requiring $138,000 for two-weeks' worth of work.

As for the future of the e-book price fixing case, Apple is appealing the ruling and Judge Cote is scheduled to hear oral arguments regarding the injunction stay on Jan. 13, 2014.

Bromwich's declaration embedded below:

post #2 of 55
He is dealing with criminals
post #3 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just_Me View Post

He is dealing with criminals

Troll bait. I suggest we ignore it.

post #4 of 55

This man is on a fishing expedition, IMHO.

 

Also, there's a broken link in the last paragraph. Should go here:

 

http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/10/04/apple-appeals-verdict-punishment-in-e-book-antitrust-case

post #5 of 55

The only crime being committed here is charging $138K for two weeks of work. 

post #6 of 55
How's his friend, the judge? Nepotism much, you crooked SOB?
post #7 of 55

This guy is fighting hard for his easy money, kind of sad but then what do you expect form a tool.

post #8 of 55
How's his friend, the judge? Nepotism much, you crooked SOB?
post #9 of 55

Bromwich is clearly over his head and charging far too much money for his "services", since he's unable to get the access he says he wants.

post #10 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by stargazerCT View Post
 

The only crime being committed here is charging $138K for two weeks of work. 

What work? he's accomplished diddly.

post #11 of 55
Bromwich continued to illustrate his disgust with his treatment by Apple executives by complaining, "they are clearly implementing passive-aggressive tactics by routinely supplying Sweet-n-Low with my mochaccinos despite my explicit commands for Splenda! And you see my Bentley out there? It's as dirty as they first day I got here!" Furthermore, the monitor was cited, while stomping his left foot, as stating, "I will continue with my threats to tell on them unless this behavior is halted immediately."
post #12 of 55

Any meeting with Michael Bromwich needs to be videotaped.  This will prove that he is investigating and monitoring way past his purview.

post #13 of 55

AppleInsider needs to stop using that stock photo of Ben Bernanke. /s

"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 #14 of 55

Unlike other companies, the executives at Apple actually work and do meaningful things that impact our world. Lawyers like this guy is just a leach. Yes, they should be angry. I wish Steve Jobs were still there to curse him out and make him cry like a little girl... EVERY. DAY.

post #15 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cletus View Post

Bromwich continued to illustrate his disgust with his treatment by Apple executives by complaining, "they are clearly implementing passive-aggressive tactics by routinely supplying Sweet-n-Low with my mochaccinos despite my explicit commands for Splenda."

Maybe he'd like some Stevia from Walter White.
Quote:
Bromwich also profiled public blowback which came in the form of profane emails after Apple called the monitor's handling of the situation "unconstitutional," labeling it as a "broad and amorphous inquisition...

Hell hath no fury like an Apple fan scorned. How is it Apple's fault that he's receiving irate emails from members of the public?

Reminds me of a jazilllion lawyer jokes.


It was so cold today I saw a lawyer with his hands in his own pockets.


What's the difference between a lawyer and God?

God doesn't think he's a lawyer.


What do you get when you cross a lawyer and a pig?

Won't happen -- there are some things even a pig won't do.


What is the difference between a leech and a lawyer? 

The leech stops sucking you dry after you're dead.


How come you can't find lawyers sunbathing on the beach?

Cats keep covering them over with sand.


What do you call a lawyer who has gone bad?

Senator.


A guy phones a law firm and says, "I want to speak to my lawyer." The receptionist says, "I'm sorry, but your lawyer died last week."

The next day the same guy phones the law firm and says, "I want to speak to my lawyer." Once again the receptionist replies, "I'm sorry, but your lawyer died last week."

The next day the guy makes his regular call to the law firm and say, "I want to speak to my lawyer." "Excuse me sir," the receptionist says, "but this is third time I've had to tell you that your lawyer died last week. Why do you keep calling?"

The guy replies, "Because I love hearing it!"
Edited by vaporland - 12/30/13 at 10:32pm
post #16 of 55
Originally Posted by jkichline View Post
curse him out and make him cry like a little girl EVERY. DAY.

 

Things like that, you know; meaningful things that impact our world. :lol:;)

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #17 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by vaporland View Post


Maybe he'd like some Stevia from Walter White.
Hell hath no fury like an Apple fan scorned.

How is it Apple's fault that he's receiving irate emails from members of the public?

Reminds me of a jazilllion lawyer jokes.


What's the difference between a lawyer and God?

God doesn't think he's a lawyer.


How come you can't find lawyers sunbathing on the beach?

Cats keep covering them over with sand.



Q: What do you call a lawyer who has gone bad?

A: Senator.



A doctor notices a sidewalk stand that says 'brains for sale.'

He goes over to investigate and sees a sign that says 'Doctor brains $8.00 a pound’ and another sign that says ‘Paramedic brains $12.00 a pound, Nurses brains $30.00 a pound, truck driver $40.00 a pound and lawyers brains $90.00 a pound.’

So he asks the man behind the cashregister, “how come his brains are only worth 8.00 and a lawyer's worth 90.00?”

The man replies, “do you know how many lawyers it takes to make a pound of brains?”



A guy phones a law firm and says, "I want to speak to my lawyer." The receptionist says, "I'm sorry, but your lawyer died last week."

The next day the same guy phones the law firm and says, "I want to speak to my lawyer." Once again the receptionist replies, "I'm sorry, but your lawyer died last week."


The next day the guy makes his regular call to the law firm and say, "I want to speak to my lawyer." "Excuse me sir," the receptionist says, "but this is third time I've had to tell you that your lawyer died last week. Why do you keep calling?"

The guy replies, "Because I love hearing it!"

 

Did you just edit out a bunch of lawyer jokes?

 

I just wanted to quote your "~~Hell hath no fury like an Apple fan scorned" line. That really made me chuckle! Instead I got a bunch of lawyer jokes!

post #18 of 55
Of course he is going to claim he is just following orders and the issue is Apple. This is his job on the line.

But if he's sticking his nose places it doesn't below, denying employees legal rights etc then it deserves to be uncovered and shut down. Even if it means going to the top. So of course Apple isn't going to back down since that is how they feel.

I can't blame them really. I still don't buy this crap that they were being anti trust when the judge kept saying everything is actually totally legal tactics and places like Amazon where never questioned. Or the need for this monitor or his being allowed to hire lawyers and force apple to pay for them because he knows zero about anti trust law. Or that it is legit for a judge to try a case and pass a judgment publicly before the official trial has begun and then cherry pick things to back up her view. It all just reeks and while I certainly wouldn't mind some industry wide changes in all digital media etc to benefit consumers I want to see it done to all not just one company because they are the top dogs.

Oh and as for his claims that no other company was this nasty to him. They just didn't have the balls. Or likely the bank.
Edited by charlituna - 12/30/13 at 10:25pm

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #19 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post
 

AppleInsider needs to stop using that stock photo of Ben Bernanke. /s

 

Arh....... No wonder why. I have always thought the two look extremely similar. 

 

Then Why AI decide to use a photo that has absolutely no relation to the article?

post #20 of 55
Love that this festering pustule is receiving irate emails from the public. I wonder what the judge's inbox is looking like these days?

The whole trial and outcome stunk to high heaven.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #21 of 55
Bromwich is Bizarro Steve Jobs
post #22 of 55
Why was Mr Broomwitch's email address not included in this article?

1wink.gif
Apple managed the astonishing feat of getting the equivalent of a personal computer into the hands of everybody from eight to eighty year olds, and did so while providing absolutely no instructions...
Reply
Apple managed the astonishing feat of getting the equivalent of a personal computer into the hands of everybody from eight to eighty year olds, and did so while providing absolutely no instructions...
Reply
post #23 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

Why was Mr Broomwitch's email address not included in this article?

1wink.gif

Because posting his email addy (mbromwich@goodwinprocter.com) would just be so, so wrong to do.

post #24 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsd View Post

Because posting his email addy (mbromwich@goodwinprocter.com) would just be so, so wrong to do.

Just. Beautifully. Evil.

1smile.gif
Apple managed the astonishing feat of getting the equivalent of a personal computer into the hands of everybody from eight to eighty year olds, and did so while providing absolutely no instructions...
Reply
Apple managed the astonishing feat of getting the equivalent of a personal computer into the hands of everybody from eight to eighty year olds, and did so while providing absolutely no instructions...
Reply
post #25 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Love that this festering pustule is receiving irate emails from the public. I wonder what the judge's inbox is looking like these days?

The whole trial and outcome stunk to high heaven.
You like the fact that this guy is receiving emails that essentially make the rest of us Apple fans look like zealous, irate jacka**es? Regardless if it's true or not the perception is there. The public already thinks of us as a mindless cult. I'd rather not add to that perception or give more fuel to the fire.

I'd rather have Apple's lawyers do the talking.
post #26 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by BestKeptSecret View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by vaporland View Post

Maybe he'd like some Stevia from Walter White.

Hell hath no fury like an Apple fan scorned.

Did you just edit out a bunch of lawyer jokes?

I just wanted to quote your "~~Hell hath no fury like an Apple fan scorned" line. That really made me chuckle! Instead I got a bunch of lawyer jokes!

sosumi!
post #27 of 55
This guy and the judge are both working for Amazon.
post #28 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

As for the future of the e-book price fixing case, Apple is appealing the ruling and Judge Cote is scheduled to hear oral arguments regarding the injunction stay on Jan. 13, 2014.
 

 

Can anyone with a legal background explain why on earth Judge Cote would be hearing or ruling on Apple's appeal of her judgements?  It seems like black (not racial) comedy to have to appeal unjust decisions to the unjust entity that made those very decisions.  Why wouldn't this appeal automatically go to an appeals court or circuit court?  Presuming that Judge Cote will reject Apple's appeal then it should go to a higher court, but this just delays justice even longer.

post #29 of 55

So how many new book deals has Apple entered into for this guy to monitor?

 

Is the ninety day deadline for Apple to present their antitrust training program to this guy up yet?

 

Otherwise he can go f*ck himself with a rake.

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
post #30 of 55
I just finished reading Bromwich's declaration. I tried to keep an open mind throughout the reading. There are many questions to be asked and answered but I doubt any asked question will be answered honestly. A few takeaways from this are...

1. Apple is not prepared to deal with the people in Washington, DC.

2. Bromwich denied he requested interviews without Apple employees having legal representation. I paused here. I realized Judge Cote had just been outed.

3. I Yahooed a statement made by the DOJ about Judge backing off from her expansion plans after Apple had exposed her. On fortune.com I found, "Buterman also noted that Judge Cote has since backed away from adopting any of several proposed expansions of Bromwich's mission, which had been the original triggering event for Apple's Thanksgiving tirade."

4. What triggered Apple's tirade were the proposed expansions.

5. Unless I missed it, Bromwich did not address the proposed expansions beyond takeaway #2.

5. I realized I was not going to maintain impartiality as I continued reading the declaration.

6. As much as Bromwich presented himself as an honest guy attempting to do his job, I cannot get beyond his relationship with Judge Cote. Something does not sound or feel right about them.

7. Are any of these meetings being recorded? Yes, there is an email trail, but how about audio and/or video as well? If Bromwich, Judge Cote, and the DOJ have nothing to hide, having all of this stuff recorded should be allowed in my opinion.

8. I am glad Al Gore is on Apple's board right now! Apple needs all the help Al can offer to get fight Washington, DC.
post #31 of 55

Of course it makes total sense for the guy who is being accused of the impropriety to defend himself without any sort of independent review or investigation. 

 

And what a cry baby move to say things like every other company I ever had to infiltrate was much more cooperative. The whole - never had to wait so long for a meeting bit - makes me wonder who the other companies were and how effectively they were being run if the board or directors could be at the beck and call of this hack. 

post #32 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Amhran View Post

You like the fact that this guy is receiving emails that essentially make the rest of us Apple fans look like zealous, irate jacka**es? Regardless if it's true or not the perception is there. The public already thinks of us as a mindless cult. I'd rather not add to that perception or give more fuel to the fire.

I'd rather have Apple's lawyers do the talking.

Yes, I do like it. Unfair, unjust actions from government need to be confronted and exposed. Sitting on your hands is no longer an option. You could be the next target of injustice, randomly applied.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #33 of 55

138 grand for two weeks work? Highway robbery.

post #34 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cletus View Post

Bromwich continued to illustrate his disgust with his treatment by Apple executives by complaining, "they are clearly implementing passive-aggressive tactics by routinely supplying Sweet-n-Low with my mochaccinos despite my explicit commands for Splenda! And you see my Bentley out there? It's as dirty as they first day I got here!" Furthermore, the monitor was cited, while stomping his left foot, as stating, "I will continue with my threats to tell on them unless this behavior is halted immediately."

And worse, they took his stapler. He's going to burn the place down.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #35 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregInPrague View Post

Can anyone with a legal background explain why on earth Judge Cote would be hearing or ruling on Apple's appeal of her judgements?

Because it is legal protocol. Apple has to play by the rules or have any higher case rejected because they didn't.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #36 of 55
Will this episode be how Jobs established Apple legacy being dismantled through US legal system?
post #37 of 55

The entire thing is ridiculous.   No one should need to be interviewed because the monitor is not about the past, for which Apple has already been "punished", it's about the future.  And as far as the future goes, all Bromovich has to do is one thing:   receive copies of any proposed agreements between Apple and publishers.    He then should be reviewing the proposed contract for any violations of the judge's order.    If there is any, he contacts the lawyer or business exec in charge of the deal and says, "unless you change X to Y, you can't do the deal."    

 

The judge said that Apple can't do Agency Agreements.    So as long as the contract doesn't contain the equivalent of an agency agreement, Apple should be in the clear.  

 

End of story.    This should be really easy and not complicated for either Apple or Bromwich.   What is interviewing Board members going to do for Bromwich?

 

I think Bromwich is trying to make a career out of this.   He obviously wants to be involved in day-to-day business decisions at Apple that IMO, go way beyond the court's mandate.

 

Apple is completely correct to be complaining about this guy.   The problem isn't that it's an unconstitutional investigation.   It's that he's trying to make this about much more than monitoring to make sure Apple doesn't do any other agency agreements.

post #38 of 55
He's fishing. Don't bite, Apple.
post #39 of 55
Lawyers will destroy this country.
post #40 of 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Lawyers will destroy this country.

Lawyers will make USA mediocre. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Antitrust monitor rebuts Apple accusations of 'unconstitutional' investigation