Judge orders Tim Cook and Craig Federighi documentation in Epic case

AppleInsiderAppleInsider
Posted:
in General Discussion edited December 2020
A judge has ordered Apple to produce documentation from Tim Cook and Craig Federighi for the Apple versus Epic lawsuit.

Tim Cook and Craig Federighi to testify
Tim Cook and Craig Federighi to testify


The Apple versus Epic lawsuit continues as publicly filed court documents tell us a bit more about the upcoming trial. Epic wants Apple to produce extensive documentation surrounding the App Store and its operations, but there has been some deliberation as to how extensive this data needs to be, and who will present it.

The document filed states that Apple will have a large burden placed on them to gather much of what Epic is asking for. The court sides with Apple here stating that Epic need not ask for more amplifying data unless absolutely necessary.

The most important part of the court filing is who's going to be made available to represent Apple. Epic has requested that Tim Cook and Craig Federighi provide deposition for the hearing.

Apple says that Tim Cook will be available, but requests his deposition be limited to four hours. Apple also requested that Erik Neuenschwander, who reports to Craig Federighi, be present instead.

The judge denied both requests, stating that Tim Cook's time limitations will not be determined until Epic receive all the proper documents from Apple. The request for Neuenschwander was also denied, with the judge reasoning that if Epic sees Federighi's leadership position over all iOS as more significant, then it is on Epic if they are wrong about Neuenshwander's significance.

The next deadline for court filings is January 6, 2021 to discuss expert declarations, with a hearing on January 8. This is just another small step forward as we await the next hearing set for July 2021.

Updated December 18, 7:06 AM ET with more details, and clarity on deposition

Apple Versus Epic - Federighi Must Testify by Mike Wuerthele on Scribd

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 19
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    More horseshit from Epic. These guys are human ticks.
    jahbladewilliamlondonbloggerblogCuJoYYCGeorgeBMacBeatscornchipwatto_cobra
  • Reply 2 of 19
    williamlondonwilliamlondon Posts: 1,426member
    A boycott campaign against Epic needs to occur, fuck them. As an Apple customer I don’t want their ideas implemented and lots more feel the same way.
    citylightsappleScot1tmaybloggerblogCuJoYYCGeorgeBMacBeatscornchipDogpersonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 19
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,389member
    Epic can go fuck itself. Yeah, I'm sure a TON of users want random app stores to be installed on their devices which which are free from following any OS/privacy/security guidelines just so the respective companies can keep 100% of the profits for themselves while still having access to all of Apple's lucrative customers using Apple's platform and tools. 


    williamlondonCuJoYYCGeorgeBMacBeatsDogpersonFidonet127watto_cobra
  • Reply 4 of 19
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,643member
    Gosh, surprised the CEO of Apple would be ordered to appear. I thought the judge in this case already signaled doubts about the veracity of Epic's claims early on. Maybe that was a different judge and venue? 
    OferDogperson
  • Reply 5 of 19
    bloggerblogbloggerblog Posts: 2,525member
    The entire tech industry, from Google to Facebook, is envious of Apple's ecosystem and its success but since they don't have the vision to build a competing system they would rather see it fail, so they can inject their run-of-the-mill products. What a bunch of scumbags. 
    edited December 2020 williamlondonCuJoYYCBeatswatto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 19
    chasmchasm Posts: 3,597member
    gatorguy said:
    Gosh, surprised the CEO of Apple would be ordered to appear. I thought the judge in this case already signaled doubts about the veracity of Epic's claims early on. Maybe that was a different judge and venue? 
    She has made clear that Epic doesn't have a real case to justify its contract-breaking, but she is being even-handed in allowing (within some limits) Epic to try and find some dirt that might justify their position, and that's fine. Epic has probably made a huge mistaken in asking for the highest levels of executives rather than the most relevant Apple people that would more have more relevant information. I wouldn't be surprised if Craig in particular answered most questions by saying "this is the limited amount I know about it, but you'd have to ask Mr. Neuenshwander for any specifics on that," which of course they're not going to be allowed to do. I think they are wasting their shot, so to speak, and I think the judge made it clear that if they did, she's not going to give Epic a do-over.

    The bottom line on this, despite Epic's childish tantrums, is pretty cut-and-dried: Epic broke its contract and can't come up with a reason that would legally justify doing so. Unless some really damaging emails turn up, Epic's got nothing (from a legal standpoint) here.
    CuJoYYCGeorgeBMaccornchipmuthuk_vanalingambala1234watto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 19
    jdwjdw Posts: 1,451member
    gatorguy said:
    Gosh, surprised the CEO of Apple would be ordered to appear.
    Why surprised?  It's probably something as petty as the judge simply wanting to see the dynamic duo up front and personal, using the law as a disguise for that real intention. Seriously.  I'm not kidding.
    cornchipwatto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 19
    bloggerblogbloggerblog Posts: 2,525member
    chasm said:
    gatorguy said:
    Gosh, surprised the CEO of Apple would be ordered to appear. I thought the judge in this case already signaled doubts about the veracity of Epic's claims early on. Maybe that was a different judge and venue? 
    ...Epic has probably made a huge mistaken in asking for the highest levels of executives rather than the most relevant Apple people that would more have more relevant information... I think they are wasting their shot, so to speak, and I think the judge made it clear that if they did, she's not going to give Epic a do-over.

    Epic knows they don't have a leg to stand on except to extend the theatre out in hopes of publicity and public sympathy. If this judge had an once of judgement she would've realized what's going on and smacked them upside the head.
    I think Zuckerberg had a great answer when asked by senators if Facebook was pushing their products ahead of their competition, he said something like "Yes we are a for profit business and do push our product ahead of our competition" duh!
    GeorgeBMaccornchipwatto_cobra
  • Reply 9 of 19
    focherfocher Posts: 688member
    It’s very normal in a case of this level to include depositions of senior executives, including the CEO. Epic is making an antitrust claim. That’s a big claim, so it’s no surprise at all that the judge allowed it. And there’s nothing that prevents Epic from deposing others too. Civil cases give a lot of power to both parties during the discovery phase. That’s just how it works. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 10 of 19
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    It sounds like EPIC is a good company to avoid doing business with:   No ethics.   Just gimmee, gimmee, gimmee....  

    Doing business with them is like doing business with the devil.   It works until it doesn't.   Then its shitty.
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 19
    BeatsBeats Posts: 3,073member
    bloggerblog said:
    The entire tech industry, from Google to Facebook, is envious of Apple's ecosystem and its success but since they don't have the vision to build a competing system they would rather see it fail, so they can inject their run-of-the-mill products. What a bunch of scumbags. 

    Well Google has knockoff iPads and knockoff iPhones. As if stealing Apple's inventions isn't enough for those scumbags.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 19
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,643member
    Beats said:
    The entire tech industry, from Google to Facebook, is envious of Apple's ecosystem and its success but since they don't have the vision to build a competing system they would rather see it fail, so they can inject their run-of-the-mill products. What a bunch of scumbags. 

    Well Google has knockoff iPads and knockoff iPhones. As if stealing Apple's inventions isn't enough for those scumbags.
    You meant Epic. This isn't anything to do with Google other than they too were sued by Epic for much the same reason they sued Apple.
    edited December 2020 GeorgeBMac
  • Reply 13 of 19
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,557member
    gatorguy said:
    Beats said:
    The entire tech industry, from Google to Facebook, is envious of Apple's ecosystem and its success but since they don't have the vision to build a competing system they would rather see it fail, so they can inject their run-of-the-mill products. What a bunch of scumbags. 

    Well Google has knockoff iPads and knockoff iPhones. As if stealing Apple's inventions isn't enough for those scumbags.
    You meant Epic. This isn't anything to do with Google other than they too were sued by Epic for much the same reason they sued Apple.
    How much does Google pay you to be here? Just asking. 
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 14 of 19
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,643member
    lkrupp said:
    gatorguy said:
    Beats said:
    The entire tech industry, from Google to Facebook, is envious of Apple's ecosystem and its success but since they don't have the vision to build a competing system they would rather see it fail, so they can inject their run-of-the-mill products. What a bunch of scumbags. 

    Well Google has knockoff iPads and knockoff iPhones. As if stealing Apple's inventions isn't enough for those scumbags.
    You meant Epic. This isn't anything to do with Google other than they too were sued by Epic for much the same reason they sued Apple.
    How much does Google pay you to be here? Just asking. 
    LOL, I like ya lkrupp. 
    GeorgeBMac
  • Reply 15 of 19
    cornchipcornchip Posts: 1,954member
    This is going to be so great. Tencent has no clue what they’re getting themselves into. Bozos. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 16 of 19
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    gatorguy said:
    Beats said:
    The entire tech industry, from Google to Facebook, is envious of Apple's ecosystem and its success but since they don't have the vision to build a competing system they would rather see it fail, so they can inject their run-of-the-mill products. What a bunch of scumbags. 

    Well Google has knockoff iPads and knockoff iPhones. As if stealing Apple's inventions isn't enough for those scumbags.
    You meant Epic. This isn't anything to do with Google other than they too were sued by Epic for much the same reason they sued Apple.

    Epic acts like they believe that they rule the world -- that the world evolves around them -- and contracts, agreements and ethics have no meaning or importance -- unless they benefit from them -- then they enforce them with ruthless vengeance.

    You are right.   That ain't Google (or most other organizations).

    Epic harkens back to the age of the American Robber Barons who set their own rules and trampled on any who dared stand in their way as if they were insects.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 17 of 19
    thrangthrang Posts: 1,034member
    chasm said:
    gatorguy said:
    Gosh, surprised the CEO of Apple would be ordered to appear. I thought the judge in this case already signaled doubts about the veracity of Epic's claims early on. Maybe that was a different judge and venue? 
    She has made clear that Epic doesn't have a real case to justify its contract-breaking, but she is being even-handed in allowing (within some limits) Epic to try and find some dirt that might justify their position, and that's fine. Epic has probably made a huge mistaken in asking for the highest levels of executives rather than the most relevant Apple people that would more have more relevant information. I wouldn't be surprised if Craig in particular answered most questions by saying "this is the limited amount I know about it, but you'd have to ask Mr. Neuenshwander for any specifics on that," which of course they're not going to be allowed to do. I think they are wasting their shot, so to speak, and I think the judge made it clear that if they did, she's not going to give Epic a do-over.

    The bottom line on this, despite Epic's childish tantrums, is pretty cut-and-dried: Epic broke its contract and can't come up with a reason that would legally justify doing so. Unless some really damaging emails turn up, Epic's got nothing (from a legal standpoint) here.
    Are you an attorney? Just curious if this is layman or legal perspective... I tend to agree with the sentiment.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 18 of 19
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,643member
    chasm said:
    gatorguy said:
    Gosh, surprised the CEO of Apple would be ordered to appear. I thought the judge in this case already signaled doubts about the veracity of Epic's claims early on. Maybe that was a different judge and venue? 
    She has made clear that Epic doesn't have a real case to justify its contract-breaking, but she is being even-handed in allowing (within some limits) Epic to try and find some dirt that might justify their position, and that's fine

    Then we might be talking two different courtrooms since the judge in this one is a he from what I'm reading.
    edited December 2020
  • Reply 19 of 19
    focherfocher Posts: 688member
    gatorguy said:
    chasm said:
    gatorguy said:
    Gosh, surprised the CEO of Apple would be ordered to appear. I thought the judge in this case already signaled doubts about the veracity of Epic's claims early on. Maybe that was a different judge and venue? 
    She has made clear that Epic doesn't have a real case to justify its contract-breaking, but she is being even-handed in allowing (within some limits) Epic to try and find some dirt that might justify their position, and that's fine

    Then we might be talking two different courtrooms since the judge in this one is a he from what I'm reading.
    The order was from a magistrate (a he), not the District Court judge (a she). Discovery disputes are typically handled by a lower magistrate. 
    williamlondongatorguywatto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.