Really jury? Apples use of DRM to limit iTunes purchases you unanimously decided equated only to genuine product improvements?! Really?! Was the prosecution really that inept in not being able to draw the parallels to US vs. Microsoft in scoping it to just certain ipods and not to the digital downloads themselves!? The prosecution was really that dim witted to not actually have witnesses who actually bought such an ipod that they restricted themselves to after going 10 years in getting case to trial? Really? What about paying for a simple download that worked nowhere else but within Apple products?! There were litterally _millions_ of both classes. I bought ONE DRM track on iTunes I think, then went to DRM free and better priced outlets like Amazon when I found out. So Judge Gonzalez Rogers calling allegations of Apple/Amazon collusion overreaching makes sense to me. The collusion angle was not the way to compare to US vs Microsoft. No Apple did this quite on their own. The point to make was sure MS was releasing genuine product improvements, but they distributed them in a bullying and monopolistic way. Not really any different here, just the bullying was directly of the consumer not OEMs and retailers. Ill take my paid for mpeg music where I please thank you very much! My car, my ANDROID devices, my mp3 players that _predated_ ipods. Copy protection is one thing but the late, great Steve Jobs, God rest his soul, argued it was needed to keep deals from labels from being revoked... Whoa what smells like updog in here. Oh its the steaming piles of bs Jobs and other Apple execs who valued their jobs left behind. Copy protection sure but vendor lock in? I dont think so. How is that not anti-competitive?? Was the jury really that thick headed or were jurors simply paid off? Really! This has been Ryan Daley standing in for Seth and Amy. No not Seth and Amy, Seth and Amy ( https://38.media.tumblr/tumblr_ls7qo0gHCd1qgv2l3o1_500.gif )
Posted on: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 14:46:37 +0000