rols

Sounds to me that if anyone is infringing on copyright, it's Cleopatra. And it's not even necessarily that they are wilfully infringing, they may believe, correctly or not, that they do have a license to distribute this music; this music has been around long enough it's passed through a number of hands. 

The complaint against Apple, if it is properly summarised in the article, is ridiculous. The idea that Apple should be able to find out that less than a hundred of the 50 million or so tunes they have on iTunes doesn't have a proper license, despite I'm sure signing contracts with Cleopatra in which that company asserts they do have the correct rights just because .. it's Apple .. stretches credulity. 

And what about devices sold outside the US, which is a decent percentage of them. Currently they are priced around US base price (before local sales taxes) plus any import and other required taxes (like VAT which is applied to the sale price, not tacked on afterwards like sales tax). If Apple cuts the production cost and absorbs the tariff in the US to keep the base price about the same, and then continues to price overseas devices against that reference price, they end up making back probably as much tariff as they absorb, or more, as devices sold overseas will not have had a US tariff paid on them. 
Surely Tim isn't going to use his overseas customers to offset his tariff bill .. oh yes he probably is isn't he. 

entropys said:

On a more serious note, if as Apple says the testing flawed, and that it retested its phones and found they were compliant with the regulation, the Chicago Tribune should be sued into oblivion. 
If there is one thing I despise more than ambulance chasing lawyers, if that is possible, it is click bait chasing activist journalists.

I doubt you'll even see a retraction. Now it's just headline and move on to the next thing. We still haven't seen a retraction, apology or even another comment on the total trash Bloomberg article about 'the big hack'. It seems that bad reporting now just gets buried quietly. 

As for the lawsuit; pretty unsurprising however, as this article states, the FCC approval does give some protection to the manufacturer as long as they can show they are making devices which conform to the test models. So apart from proving harm which is going to be basically impossible the lawyers would have to get around the FCC as well. I'm sure the FCC will look again at all these devices and if they agree they are conformant, that'll be an end of it .. if however they find Apple hasn't been manufacturing in accordance with the specs of the test devices and fines them .. then it might get messy. I doubt very much this is going to happen.  

eightzero said:

rols said:

Wonder how this is going to work in practice. Anyone with a 15" macbook pro, assuming every screener is able to tell a macbook pro from anything else, let alone a 15" one from a 13" one, is going to have to turn it on and show the manufacture date? The Bloomberg article referenced says that laptops which have had their batteries replaced are not affected, how do you prove this? What happens to the laptops which are deemed unsuitable to fly, are they destroyed, kept for your return .. ? 
Or is this one of those bans which relies on passengers being honest? If the first people know of it is when hear an announcement when they're standing in line and they have a several thousand dollar macbook pro in their bag, there's some incentive for staying quiet. 

I am not dispensing any advice myself, but this is spectacularly bad advice. 

... except my post wasn't advice, it was a comment on human nature and what people may be likely to do when faced with the scenario described. 

Wonder how this is going to work in practice. Anyone with a 15" macbook pro, assuming every screener is able to tell a macbook pro from anything else, let alone a 15" one from a 13" one, is going to have to turn it on and show the manufacture date? The Bloomberg article referenced says that laptops which have had their batteries replaced are not affected, how do you prove this? What happens to the laptops which are deemed unsuitable to fly, are they destroyed, kept for your return .. ? 
Or is this one of those bans which relies on passengers being honest? If the first people know of it is when hear an announcement when they're standing in line and they have a several thousand dollar macbook pro in their bag, there's some incentive for staying quiet.