22july2013

A lot of people here are inferring that a hostile question from a judge means that the judge's decision will reflect her questions. This is a presumptuous belief. Many judges ask difficult questions so that their opinions, which are going to be favourable to the person being spoken to, have all the possible angles covered. I learned this from reading the US Supreme Court transcripts.

Or maybe she's an idiot judge. Both explanations are possible.

hackintoisier said:

...my view is Apple is in some ways restricting trade by disallowing the existence of other app stores. And the restriction of trade is why I believe it’s just a matter a time before the hammer drops, whether in the USA, or Europe or elsewhere. 

There are scores of dictatorships in the world and I'm sure that one of them will bring down the hammer soon enough. And I'm looking forward to that because when some country, like Russia, demands something totally unreasonable, Apple will just shut down the App Store in that entire country. There will be no third party apps any more in that country until the hammer is lifted. Otherwise, if Russia requires an Epic App Store on iOS, and Apple permits it, then people in America will find a way to access the Russian Epic App Store, using VPNs. If Apple caves and allows app stores run by other companies, I will tell my friends to not bother buying Apple anymore because I won't support them. I'll switch to Android since it's cheaper.

AppleInsider said:

Although Apple claims to treat every developer the same, some evidence to the contrary has surfaced during the Epic Games v. Apple trial. For example, Apple reportedly has a set of whitelisted developers -- which includes Hulu -- that are able to gain special subscription-based features.

Yes, the idea of pilot testing new features does seem to slightly contradict the idea of treating all developers equally, but on a scale of 1 to 100 of evilness this contradiction is only a 3. Apple should clarify what it means and all should be well.

In 2012 Tencent invested $330 million and got 40% of Epic, while in 2020 Sony invested $250 million and got 1.4%. Interesting.

The ITC has a role in resolving legal issues regarding trade and importation. It isn't a court, and doesn't use a jury, but its findings can be reviewed by a court.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_International_Trade_Commission

I think AliveCor is considering the Apple Watch to be an imported product, therefore it may fall under the ITC's jurisdiction. I've always thought of Apple products as American products, but maybe I'm wrong on that. Maybe all of Apple's products are "foreign products" and are therefore subject to ITC jurisdiction.