The world doesn't want us to police the world. That was made abundantly clear when George W. Bush invaded Iraq to topple Saddam Hussein. I didn't think it was where we should have deployed our military, but that's another story. The world thought that we should have gone in with the U.N. instead.
I think you need to point the finger at the U.N. at this point who don't seem to concerned with the matters you bring up, no matter how much the U.S. could do. I should also point out that applying military force in situations that are not so clearly defined, rarely solves the issue.
The world doesn't want us to police the world. That was made abundantly clear when George W. Bush invaded Iraq to topple Saddam Hussein. I didn't think it was where we should have deployed our military, but that's another story. The world thought that we should have gone in with the U.N. instead.
I think you need to point the finger at the U.N. at this point who don't seem to concerned with the matters you bring up, no matter how much the U.S. could do. I should also point out that applying military force in situations that are not so clearly defined, rarely solves the issue.
I'm very grateful that the world does not control the U.S. Military. That would be odd to say the least. However I do wish that the U.S. Government actually controlled the U.S. military. That would make me quite a bit happier.
Is Judge Cote for real? @conternotions on Twitter periodically posts sarcastic Tweets about Cote fining Apple for everything under the sun, but no parody of her can touch the real thing. Apple should fight this thing tooth and nail all the way to the Supreme Court.
Especially with the Amazon - Hachette thing happening you have to live in a particularly deep cave not to realize that Amazon is the predatory monopolist in the book business
So according to the proposed settlement - Apple would only have to settle if they were ultimately found guilty of price fixing; that seems fair. The Judge wants them to pay even if a later court finds them not guilty of price-fixing???
I don't understand how they were found guilty in the first place - can someone enlighten me without jokes, puns, etc...
As I understand it the appeal could have 3 results: Cote was right, Cote was wrong, or the trial was botched and we need a new one.
In that last case Apple settles for just 70m, which Cote thinks is not enough.
Another nice touch is wanting Apple to pay interest while she stalls the appeal.
How they were found guilty is a bit of a mystery for me too. It seems to me that any similarity in the publishers actions is adequately explained by the shared experience of Amazon having them by the balls, and squeezing. No collusion required.
It has been mentioned that Apple is being punished for not playing along in the political circus, spending too little on lobbyists and such.
This is ridiculous! The underdog in eBook world which is monopolized by Amazon is being punished for price-fixing. Give me a break! Secondly, as a consumer I never see the money. This continue to happens, I have gotten notices from lawyers about class action suits, which some I was part of it and it tells me to spend hours to note things down to get $1.49 coupon I can use somewhere - WTF? So I rarely bother go through the motions. I have hand full of those sitting in my drawers.
So the bottom line - It is the lawyers who are basically making out in all of this. Now, if I remember, judges were lawyers too before than before judges - So at the end of the day...isn't think like "back scratching". The whole system is an hoax.
As an e-book consumer I've always felt that Judge Cote's myopic perspective and kowtowing to the money grabbing whims of the DOJ and monopolistic ambitions of Amazon is incredibly damaging to consumers and publishers. She has emboldened Amazon with a near monopolistic powers to direct publisher's and content owners to do whatever Amazon directs them to do, even if it destroys their businesses. This includes forcing e-books publishers to accept that their wares must be wholesale priced to support Amazon's use of them as loss leaders to buy market share and destroy competition in the ebook market. Ultimately, the DOJ's mission appears to be aimed at giving Amazon total exclusivity in the ebook marketplace. I think it's high time that the DOJ and the Judge explain to consumers how a government sanctioned monopoly in the ebook marketplace is in the best interests of consumers.
This judge is prejudiced and simply evil wrong. She needs to be tried and convicted - preferably with U.S. 9th Circuit Court Chief Judge Alex Kozinski's favorite outcomes.
Especially with the Amazon - Hachette thing happening you have to live in a particularly deep cave not to realize that Amazon is the predatory monopolist in the book business
+1
I thought the Amazon Hachette bullying made this statement by the judge particularly tin eared. I don't think the judge is in the back pocket of Amazon or anything (that's pretty paranoid) but she definitely is not seeing the big picture.
Especially with the Amazon - Hachette thing happening you have to live in a particularly deep cave not to realize that Amazon is the predatory monopolist in the book business
She thinks the publishers should have filed a complaint about Amazon. Nobody did, so everything is fine. She said as much once.
Of course the publishers have zero confidence that the judicial system can solve their Amazon problem in a way they can afford.
"Here’s a sample of what lawyers who have appeared before her — writing anonymously for obvious reasons — have posted:
Judge Cote has a bubbly style but it masks an inclination toward pre judging issues, including deciding early on who the good guy is and who the bad guy is and ruling accordingly.
Judge Cote predetermines outcome of the case and consistently rules accordingly even in contradiction to her own orders.
Her rulings are generally “sly” and calculated to ignore the pertinent issues raised, which is always allows the prosecution team to prevail.
Judge Cote’s pre-disposition and bias are evident from the first moments she is encountered in the Courtroom.
It seemed clear that she had pre-judged the case and the parties before hearing the merits, and proceeded to rule accordingly without regard for the facts and law.
As several commenters have noted, this judge pre-determines which parties should win at the outset, and is blatantly enamored of big-name firms and gov’t entities. Engages in legal contortions to reach outcomes on behalf of her pet party, even to the extent of ignoring applicable black-letter law… God help us all if she is elevated to the Second Circuit."
How about $3.50 per gallon gas prices! What an idiot this judge is. Talk about missing the pertinent issues. More $ has been spent on this nonsense; than on providing luches for under priveleged kids.
gee, there was no damages since the lawsuit was fill immediate about apples announce plans. It was not like Apple and publisher was doing this for years before someone called foul. No consumer was damage since consumers could still buy cheap books at Amazon like they always have been.
The courts and local AG's act like consumers have been over paying for years.
So according to the proposed settlement - Apple would only have to settle if they were ultimately found guilty of price fixing; that seems fair. The Judge wants them to pay even if a later court finds them not guilty of price-fixing???
I don't understand how they were found guilty in the first place - can someone enlighten me without jokes, puns, etc...
Finding Apple guilty makes as much sense as wanting Apple to pay even if they are innocent.
The only way to understand it is to realize that the judge is on a power trip and probably doing her best to line the pockets of her friends.
Comments
The world doesn't want us to police the world. That was made abundantly clear when George W. Bush invaded Iraq to topple Saddam Hussein. I didn't think it was where we should have deployed our military, but that's another story. The world thought that we should have gone in with the U.N. instead.
I think you need to point the finger at the U.N. at this point who don't seem to concerned with the matters you bring up, no matter how much the U.S. could do. I should also point out that applying military force in situations that are not so clearly defined, rarely solves the issue.
I'm very grateful that the world does not control the U.S. Military. That would be odd to say the least. However I do wish that the U.S. Government actually controlled the U.S. military. That would make me quite a bit happier.
Is Judge Cote for real? @conternotions on Twitter periodically posts sarcastic Tweets about Cote fining Apple for everything under the sun, but no parody of her can touch the real thing. Apple should fight this thing tooth and nail all the way to the Supreme Court.
Especially with the Amazon - Hachette thing happening you have to live in a particularly deep cave not to realize that Amazon is the predatory monopolist in the book business
So according to the proposed settlement - Apple would only have to settle if they were ultimately found guilty of price fixing; that seems fair. The Judge wants them to pay even if a later court finds them not guilty of price-fixing???
I don't understand how they were found guilty in the first place - can someone enlighten me without jokes, puns, etc...
As I understand it the appeal could have 3 results: Cote was right, Cote was wrong, or the trial was botched and we need a new one.
In that last case Apple settles for just 70m, which Cote thinks is not enough.
Another nice touch is wanting Apple to pay interest while she stalls the appeal.
How they were found guilty is a bit of a mystery for me too. It seems to me that any similarity in the publishers actions is adequately explained by the shared experience of Amazon having them by the balls, and squeezing. No collusion required.
It has been mentioned that Apple is being punished for not playing along in the political circus, spending too little on lobbyists and such.
This is ridiculous! The underdog in eBook world which is monopolized by Amazon is being punished for price-fixing. Give me a break! Secondly, as a consumer I never see the money. This continue to happens, I have gotten notices from lawyers about class action suits, which some I was part of it and it tells me to spend hours to note things down to get $1.49 coupon I can use somewhere - WTF? So I rarely bother go through the motions. I have hand full of those sitting in my drawers.
So the bottom line - It is the lawyers who are basically making out in all of this. Now, if I remember, judges were lawyers too before than before judges - So at the end of the day...isn't think like "back scratching". The whole system is an hoax.
This judge is prejudiced and simply evil wrong. She needs to be tried and convicted - preferably with U.S. 9th Circuit Court Chief Judge Alex Kozinski's favorite outcomes.
Especially with the Amazon - Hachette thing happening you have to live in a particularly deep cave not to realize that Amazon is the predatory monopolist in the book business
+1
I thought the Amazon Hachette bullying made this statement by the judge particularly tin eared. I don't think the judge is in the back pocket of Amazon or anything (that's pretty paranoid) but she definitely is not seeing the big picture.
Especially with the Amazon - Hachette thing happening you have to live in a particularly deep cave not to realize that Amazon is the predatory monopolist in the book business
She thinks the publishers should have filed a complaint about Amazon. Nobody did, so everything is fine. She said as much once.
Of course the publishers have zero confidence that the judicial system can solve their Amazon problem in a way they can afford.
Or at all.
This type of thing seems to be her behavior. Have a look:
http://fortune.com/2013/08/14/the-curious-case-of-apple-ebook-judge-denise-cote/
"Here’s a sample of what lawyers who have appeared before her — writing anonymously for obvious reasons — have posted:
Judge Cote has a bubbly style but it masks an inclination toward pre judging issues, including deciding early on who the good guy is and who the bad guy is and ruling accordingly.
Talk about missing the pertinent issues. More $ has been spent on this nonsense; than
on providing luches for under priveleged kids.
Yeah, Amazon really ate the bar on that one.
gee, there was no damages since the lawsuit was fill immediate about apples announce plans. It was not like Apple and publisher was doing this for years before someone called foul. No consumer was damage since consumers could still buy cheap books at Amazon like they always have been.
The courts and local AG's act like consumers have been over paying for years.
I've heard of eccentric judges, but this one takes the prize.
Finding Apple guilty makes as much sense as wanting Apple to pay even if they are innocent.
The only way to understand it is to realize that the judge is on a power trip and probably doing her best to line the pockets of her friends.
I think judges should have term limits, no matter who they are.