larryjw

Good idea. Not that Apple doesn't pay taxes, already -- it's where the taxes are allocated. The G7 agreed that companies would pay the taxes where the transactions occurred and the minimum is 15%. 

I doubt whether Apple will see much of an increase. Apple argued in the Irish case, that it didn't matter for them how the case turned out -- it was a case of allocation of tax revenue, not the tax itself. 

Since I started using Apple Pay and of course the Apple Wallet, I’ve had to change how I monitor my finances. No longer weekly or biweekly. 

Now, every day, my breakfast includes starting up Quicken, and reconciling all the transactions from the previous day — all auto payments, all debt transaction, all credit card transactions, all Apple Pay transactions and its cash adjustments. 

Serious problem -- for all of us. Certainly, it's not just Apple and their security contractor, but the justice system. 

The allegation of potential evidence deleted makes it all worse. 

I’m not understanding the anti-steering arguments.

Every app entry in the App Store has a link to the developers website. From their website, the developer is free to make any information they want available, and, of course, get the user to signup for offers and alternative platform options.

Whatever anti-steering provisions Apple requires of developers, it must be of the most narrow of restrictions in fact. 

I have no idea how this judge is going to make her decision. But, if her decision is to say "I don't agree with how Apple is making its business decisions", I think she will have overstepped her judicial authority. 

The judge needs can only make a decision based upon legal principles. Apple or any other business is allowed to make any business decisions it likes for the most part, with the market, only, deciding whether those decisions are reasonable or not. With Epic admitting that Apple only accounts for 7% of Epic's revenue, I would expect the judge to have difficulty justifying Apple is restricting Epic's market unfairly. 

One also needs to understand the judge's limitations. The judge must also be cognizant of how the Appeals courts will view her decision. No judge wants to be smacked down by superior courts for making wholly unjustified decisions.