Apple Probed in Anti-Competive iPod Practices
-
Apple claims that deleting rival music provider's content from iPods was a legitimate security measure.
-
What happens if Apple lose this case?
(unlikely but still) -
Likely just a fine.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Likely just a fine.
I'd like to see them forced to plant (and keep up) banana trees at their HQ with a sign "these are for the monkeys in charge here"
-
It's complete BS. It's just Apple trying to monopolize things.
-
Or scare tactics. They make people think it's not safe to buy songs from Amazon or anywhere else, or that it might be safe but they could get deleted, etc. The lawsuit is just a publicity stunt. I can't think of any rational way they could win, but the press will do the real job and accomplish the real objective.
-
Out of curiosity is a de facto monopoly still an illegal monopoly? There are plenty of other music players on the market that play very nicely with any of the other big marketplaces. It isn't like they leveraged their monopoly position to hinder the sale of other music players.
Although I agree, I noticed this tactic when my siblings had purchased DRM-free or otherwise music from different marketplaces and couldn't get it on their iPods, it is a very nasty way to ensure that you are the only ones that would get music on your devices.
-
@coliver said:
Out of curiosity is a de facto monopoly still an illegal monopoly?
Monopolies are legal. There is no concept of an illegal monopoly. It is anti-trust tactics that are illegal.
-
I'm glad to see Apple get their come-uppance on all these fronts. I like their products, but they do some shitty things.
-
@coliver said:
It isn't like they leveraged their monopoly position to hinder the sale of other music players.
They did, it's called iTunes. They created a massive DRM'd marketplace that does exactly this.
