No foolin'

http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2006/2/9/2822

http://www.ehomeupgrade.com/entry/2095/northern_california_judge

What a load of crap.

1) You can put more than iTunes music on your iPod. Buy a CD. Download a free MP3. Audio capture any other music service.

2) You can use iTunes music on other devices. Burn a CD. Rerip to MP3 for other devices.

There are lots of options here. Too many times lawsuits aren't caused by the actions of a company. It's caused bythe stupidity of the customer. In this case, the people are just too dumb to figure out how to make the system work for them.

I hate the whole "let's sue 'em" mentality that seems to prevalent in the US.

Some other guy is also suing Apple because the iPod can cause hearing problems.

Honestly, how STUPID are some people? It's incredible.

Probably a nitpick, but it's a class-action lawsuit brought by an individual against Apple. An "Antitrust Case" is a completely different animal; they are brought by an agent of the government against a corporation.

The fact that the Sherman Act is grounds for the class action does not mean it's an Antitrust Action anymore than a wrongful death suit against OJ Simpson is a murder charge. It's just a basis (which is mandatory) to continue the action by making an assertion there was a legal harm (the minimum requirement for any civil suit). The challenge, of course, is to prove any of it, which is no small feat, to put it mildly.

Whether Apple even has a legal monopoly is highly suspect; as the Dept of Justice vs Microsoft (a true Antitrust Action) and to an even larger extent the Netscape vs Microsoft case (a civil suit, like this one, based on the Sherman Act) clearly shows, with technology companies there is a rather generous window to allow for rapidly changing markets to find an equilibrium.

Normally 80% of the market can mean monopoly, and to be held to be in a monopoly situtuation is the minimum requirement to trigger the special rules of the Sherman Act, but this is not about a railroad, and the courts have generally held that for IT the window for declaring a monopoly is much wider and longer than with other business. In other words, Apple needs to dominate online music for a few years in the future or this is bunk; at best it's premature.

And, as the articles point out, "it's a longshot" is no idle phrase when referring to this.

Personally, I find the "Apple sued" stories a little tiresome; a company with such a high profile attracts a lot of hopeful litigation, very little of which ever is found to have merit. Has there <i>ever</i> been a week where there wasn't an Apple Sued topic on the first page of ehMac?

Ambulance chasing, basically.

What a load of crap.

1) You can put more than iTunes music on your iPod. Buy a CD. Download a free MP3. Audio capture any other music service.

2) You can use iTunes music on other devices. Burn a CD. Rerip to MP3 for other devices.

There are lots of options here. Too many times lawsuits aren't caused by the actions of a company. It's caused bythe stupidity of the customer. In this case, the people are just too dumb to figure out how to make the system work for them.

They're not buying it this time....

I understand that the proposed resolution to the lawsuit is that Internet Explorer will have to be resurrected and bundled with every Apple computer.

I understand that the proposed resolution to the lawsuit is that Internet Explorer will have to be resurrected and bundled with every Apple computer.

LOL, that's a good one :)