Apple appeals in e-book collusion case

[jes]

Apple files appeal in e-book collusion case

Apple is fighting a legal order requiring the company to modify its digital book contracts and submit to oversight by a court-appointed antitrust monitor.

 

[Jola]

Apple were in the wrong here, the legal order should not be modified.

 

[cerebus]

Apple were in the wrong here, the legal order should not be modified.

Coincidentally the same decision the judge made before the trial even began, and apparently didn't pay the slightest bit of attention to any evidence entered once the trial was in proceeding.

 

[Valerion]

Coincidentally the same decision the judge made before the trial even began, and apparently didn't pay the slightest bit of attention to any evidence entered once the trial was in proceeding.

Yes, a biased judge. There's absolutely no possibility that Apple didn't present a compelling defence at all.

Source of this claim?

 

[cerebus]

Yes, a biased judge. There's absolutely no possibility that Apple didn't present a compelling defence at all.

Source of this claim?

http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2013/08/14/apple-ebook-judge-cote-2/
The Robing Room (legal peer rating forum)

There's a start. Apple presented a number of quite compelling arguments but it was pretty clear from go that the verdict had already been decided.