Huge Legal Booboo in Apple Anti-Trust Suit Ping!
If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me.
Posted on 12/07/2014 12:35:26 AM PST by Swordmaker
“Apple Inc said it discovered that the lead consumer in a $1 billion group antitrust lawsuit over the iPod didn’t buy a device in the time period covered by the case, which could derail a trial now under way,” Karen Gullo reports for Bloomberg.
“Bill Isaacson, Apple’s attorney, told U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers that plaintiff Marianna Rosen’s iPod was purchased in July 2009, three months after a deadline for iPod owners to be included in the case. The case, filed in 2005, is over claims that Apple sought to thwart rival music stores to maintain a monopoly over digital players,” Gullo reports. “‘I am concerned that I don’t have a plaintiff,’ Rogers said in court today while the jury was on a break in the third day of trial in Oakland, California. ‘That’s a problem.'”
“Bonny Sweeney, Rosen’s attorney, told Rogers she hadn’t yet reviewed Apple’s claims. The only other named plaintiff in the case didn’t purchase an iPod during the period covered by the lawsuit, she said.,” Gullo reports. “A named plaintiff in a class action has to be an individual who was injured by the conduct being challenged in the lawsuit, said Vikram Amar, a law professor at University of California at Davis. Another person could take Rosen’s place as a named plaintiff under procedures approved by Rogers, he said.”
If you want on or off the Mac Ping List, Freepmail me.
This case has been proceeding for NINE years since being file as a class action by the lawyers who created it. . . it’s now in trial. Only now does it turn out that the two lead plaintiffs cannot possibly have been injured by the activity they are suing about because THEY DID NOT OWN THE PRODUCT DURING PERIOD TO WHICH THE LAWYERS THEMSELVES LIMITED THE CASE! One bought her iPod three months after the last date possible, and the other even later than that!
Total incompetence. . . and a completely manufactured complaint and case created for the benefit of the attorneys bringing it.
Why do you post so much about Apple? Makes it look like it is a cult.
Thanks for posting it bro. Typical lawyers.
Same with the CD pricefixing lawsuit.
The companies were still engaging in bad activity.
I don’t join class action lawsuits but some people think getting a $10 credit slip is “good” because it is “free money”.
The states that piled on the CD lawsuit and the tobacco lawsuit thought it was cool too. Then they got paid off in cutout CDs while the lawyers took the cash.
Not a cult. It makes it look like he likes Apple!
Apple deleted songs from customers’ iPods
By Dan Simon @CNNTech December 4, 2014: 5:16 PM ET
http://money.cnn.com/2014/12/04/technology/apple-ipod-trial/index.html
Between 2007 and 2009, Apple routinely deleted music off of some customers’ iPods without telling them.
That’s according to an attorney representing plaintiffs in a class-action trial taking place this week. A class of 8 million iPod owners argue that Apple abused its monopoly power in the music industry to force out competition.
When iPod customers downloaded music from iTunes rivals, Apple (AAPL, Tech30) would force customers to reset their iPods, the attorney said. When the iPod was restored, the music they downloaded from competitors’ music stores would no longer be on their iPods.
Apple claims that the measures were taken to protect its contracts with the record labels...
You’ve only been here 2 months. How do you know anyone’s posting history?
Unless you’re a retread. Are you?
It’s his specialty, he handles it well, and we appreciate it.
It’s ok for people to have a hobby. At least he’s not into... Sports!
LOL! I’m no fan of Apple, but I hate lawyers even more, and they will be the BIG LOSERS if the case collapses on this.
that’s Moderne America for ya!
“LOL! I’m no fan of Apple, but I hate lawyers even more, and they will be the BIG LOSERS if the case collapses on this.”
The case has been going on for nine years. During due diligence Apple has been compelled to release thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of internal documents to the plaintiff attorneys. In the course of nine years these attorneys have studied the documents for evidence to the support their case as well as other potential issues they might turn into into a case for another shakedown.
If the judge appropriately throws out the case because the named plaintiffs have no standing, the lawyers will likely soon be back with a completely new case constructed from the information gleaned during the fishing expedition on this case.
The attorneys who specialize in these corporate shakedowns never give up.
/johnny
Probably true...still set back their jackpot by years, though. They’ll be able to use the payoff for their nursing home care.
It is and you wouldn’t understand...
Klhatoo Niktoh Baraata...
The Wall Street Journal had this story Friday, and I thought about posting it for Swordmaker and his ping list. Since I knew they’d like the schadenfreude of seeing meretricious legal action against a good company (not that I am a fan of Tim Cook’s personal life) being so easily confounded. But I only saw it on the dead tree version, don’t subscribe to the web site.I can’t afford a Masserati, but I can afford a 5K iMac. So forgive me, please, if I enjoy and appreciate good things - like an Apple computer, and FreeRepublic.com.
Because he’s the “Apple guy” who brings Apple news for those of us who have subscribed to his list.
Does that make sense?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.