Implications of DOJ vs Apple for developers?

[Dr. Hawkins]

On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 6:29 PM, Mike Kerner <MikeKerner at roadrunner.com> wrote:
> There has been no decision on remedies.  The remedies you listed are NOT
> the ones approved by the court, just proposed by the DOJ.

Having *some* familiarity with this area of law from my former life, though,
something like this is likely what remedies will look like, give or
take (but there
are other possibilities).

Keep in mind that if the judge hadn't run around shooting off his mouth in
public, Microsoft would be two companies today  . . . (contrary to
popular belief
and the Microsoft line, the split *not* found inappropriate or overturned---the
appellate court vacated everything the judge did after a certain date as his
behavior undermined public confidence in his neutrality and the fairness
of the process [and *noone*, except perhaps OJ, has *ever* gotten more due
process out of the system]).

>We can debate
> how rational or bizarre the decision seems, but until it has worked its way
> through to SCOTUS, nothing is really decided.  I would be surprised if
> SCOTUS let this stand, as any of the publishers was free to tell Apple to
> go to hell, but simply chose not to.

This might even end at the circuit court.  The underlying legal theory is kind
of bizarre, and against the trend of the last 30 years of antitrust
law:  To deal
with an oligopoly, you built market power among the victims, and used this
market power in a way that lowers prices for consumers.

Yeah, the oligopolists were hurt, but so what?  This was very much
pro-consumer behavior.  The prosecution is in line with 1950's litigation
against IBM, not a judiciary which has digested Bork's "Antitrust Paradox"
and Posner's writing on the subject.




-- 
Dr. Richard E. Hawkins, Esq.
(702) 508-8462