A judge orders Apple to let her friend investigate every aspect of the company and then pay him for it. When another court looks askance at that arrangement and suspends it, the judge defends her original decision by using the "if you've done nothing wrong, you've nothing to hide" logic. Really? Meanwhile, Samsung only wants to settle out of court if they do not have to promise to stop copying Apple. True story, though you might not believe it. Read on.
Last July, Apple lost an antitrust lawsuit brought by the Department of Justice. The lawsuit, initiated by Amazon, was a little odd from the beginning, what with the presiding judge announcing before the trial that she fully expected Apple to lose. Everything seemed to happen exactly the way Amazon needed it to happen; U.S. District Judge Denise Cote ruled against Apple, and included some very harsh sentencing that should help Amazon regain much of its lost eBook monopoly. But Apple is not giving up that easily.
Now that Apple has proven in court that Samsung slavishly copied the iPhone, and proved it twice, we have approached the part of the event where everyone scrambles to figure out who owes what part of the bill. Like two people on a blind date gone bad, Apple and Samsung both want to go home without paying any more than they have to. Here's hoping they just use one credit card for the bill, because people who give the waiter a handful of plastic to ring up separate amounts are totally annoying. Don't do that. So, what's the damage? Read on.
The jury reached a verdict this afternoon in the "Groundhog Day" retrial between Apple and Samsung, and the decision hits Samsung's bank account hard. The ruling brings the total amount Samsung owes Apple fairly close to the original amount the jury decided upon last summer, give or take a hundred million. And despite all the numbers flying around, the biggest story coming out of this courtroom is possibly what the jurors ate for lunch. Read on.
When the jury gathers in November to determine the new amount that Samsung owes Apple for copying the iPhone and iPad, Samsung would like it very much if no one was allowed to tell the jury about how it copied the iPhone and iPad. Also, Apple has decided to break down and take care of Breaking Bad viewers who didn't know they had to pay twice for the final season. Another week of adventures for the Cupertino legal team!
A basic rule of employment is that you pay your employees for the time your require them to be at work. Generally, courts don't look too kindly on companies that force you to stay at work and refuse to pay you for it. Especially if you're keeping them there, off the clock, just to make sure they're not stealing from you, which is apparently exactly what Apple's retail store policy does. Now a couple of former Apple employees are taking on the vaunted Cupertino legal team to make it right. A class-action suit representing over 42,000 employees could get pretty, pretty, pretty expensive. And if that's not enough for Apple to worry about, the company is back in the ring with Google, bickering about negotiating tactics. All in another week of Law & Apple!
Apple lost the Ebook trial, and we were surprised. We thought the government's case was crumbling. We thought the winds had shifted to Apple's favor. We thought that once the truth of the Department of Justice's case againstApple (for allegedly conspiring with publisher to price-fix eBooks) was revealed, there was no way Cupertino would lose. We're sorry. We were wrong. We were not alone in this assessment, however. Either way, what does Apple do now? Let's discuss.
If you are a patent holder and you haven't tried to sue Apple, you really are sort of bush league. Suing Apple is what all the cool patent holders are doing. This week, Boston University is looking to land a windfall of cash from Cupertino, and there might be a pretty good chance that university will win. Also, catch up on the details of the Department of Justice's big case against Apple, as we all await the final ruling that could change the way eBooks are sold.
As the Department of Justice eBook trial against Apple enters it's third, and likely final, week, two themes consistently emerge: one, the entire DOJ case seems built on a flimsy house of cards that continues to get knocked down; and two, Amazon was a major player in making this lawsuit happen. It seems reasonable to many that Apple will walk away from this case vindicated and victorious. Maybe. Will Apple prevail and, if not, what happens next? Read on.
As the Department of Justice's bizarre prosecution of Apple hits the halfway point of a scheduled three-week trial, there are some clues that perhaps the winds are shifting in favor of Cupertino. This entire case, which could only seem more sponsored by Amazon if its logo was displayed behind the judge's bench, started out with a great deal of hyperbole against Apple, as well as a judge that seemed to have decided the case before it began. Now, as the smoke clears from the DOJ's initial courtroom (and media) assault, it doesn't seem as clear-cut to everyone that Apple is the bad guy. In fact, it is even becoming obvious to many, including perhaps the judge, that Apple actually did not do anything illegal or unethical, and has actually greatly helped the eBook market since coming on the scene. Let's catch up on the last week and a half of this increasingly fascinating case.