Steve Jobs owned

Homeslice · 03-29-2011, 04:44 PM

I figured this article would pass muster here. Big companies shouldn't be hated on unless they're Apple.

NEW YORK | Tue Mar 22, 2011 2:23pm EDT

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Apple Inc. Chief Executive Steve Jobs, who is out on medical leave, has been ordered by a federal magistrate to answer questions from plaintiffs' lawyers in an antitrust lawsuit related to his company's iTunes business.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Howard Lloyd, based in San Jose, California, ruled that lawyers representing the plaintiffs in the suit may question Jobs for a total of two hours. He issued the ruling on Monday.

Apple could appeal the ruling to a district judge, but it would likely have to make a case that the magistrate "made a big mistake," said Professor David Levine at University of California Hastings College of the Law.

An Apple spokeswoman declined to comment, and attorneys for the plaintiffs did not respond to requests for comment.

In the class-action lawsuit, a group of consumers say Apple created a music-downloading monopoly with its iPod player and iTunes store. At issue is a piece of software called Fairplay that allowed only music bought on iTunes to be played on the iPod, according to the complaint.

One competitor, RealNetworks Inc, responded in 2004 by introducing a new technology that would allow customers to play music downloaded from its site on their iPods. Apple quickly announced a software upgrade to iTunes that once more blocked music from RealNetworks, the complaint charges.

"The court finds that Jobs has unique, non-repetitive, first hand knowledge about Apple's software updates in October 2004 that rendered the RealNetworks's digital music files once again inoperable with iPods," Lloyd wrote in his ruling.

The ruling comes amid intense questions about Jobs' health and whereabouts. Earlier this month an energetic but thin Jobs resurfaced to unveil Apple's new iPad. His appearance helped reassure investors and fans worried about what his absence might mean for the company.

Apple failed to provide specific examples of how a deposition of Jobs would constitute "undue hardship," the plaintiffs wrote in a court filing last December.

Lloyd said the deposition of Jobs would be limited to questions about the back-and-forth with RealNetworks in 2004. Apple had sought to prevent the deposition altogether, while the plaintiffs asked to be allowed a broader inquiry.

"By limiting the scope of the deposition, the judge is trying to avoid using this as some sort of tool for embarrassment or annoyance," Levine said.

Should a district judge uphold Lloyd's ruling, Levine said it would be extremely difficult for either side to appeal further.

The case is in re Apple iPod iTunes antitrust litigation, Case No. 05-00037, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California.

Apple is involved in a host of other lawsuits, both as a plaintiff and defendant, ranging from disputes over patents to antitrust allegations. On Monday, Apple sued Amazon.com Inc in a bid to stop the online retailer from improperly using its APP STORE trademark, according to a court filing.

(Reporting by Paul Thomasch in New York, Dan Levine in San Francisco and Sakthi Prasad in Bangalore; Editing by Gerald E. McCormick and Derek Caney)

Avatard · 03-29-2011, 04:52 PM

Totally valid, and furthermore, totally ironic, given that Real is a stinking pile of shit no morals fucking company itself.

anthonyk · 03-29-2011, 05:15 PM

Owned?

Particle Man · 03-29-2011, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avatard

Totally valid, and furthermore, totally ironic, given that Real is a stinking pile of shit no morals fucking company itself.

I HATE Real's crap software

Homeslice · 03-29-2011, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by anthonyk

Owned?

Quote:

Steve Jobs, who is out on medical leave, has been ordered by a federal magistrate to answer questions.....

Apple failed to provide specific examples of how a deposition of Jobs would constitute "undue hardship," the plaintiffs wrote.....

anthonyk · 03-29-2011, 05:36 PM

I dunno, having the plaintiffs' lawyers limited to two hours seems like a win to me.

pauldun170 · 03-29-2011, 05:37 PM

Ummmm...
So they weren't able to convince the Judge that Jobs medical condition was serious enough that he could not answer a couple of questions? Or was it a timing issue?

I personally think the lawsuit should be chucked out the window.

Ummmm...
So they weren't able to convince the Judge that Jobs medical condition was serious enough that he could not answer a couple of questions? Or was it a timing issue?

I personally think the lawsuit should be chucked out the window.

Homeslice · 03-29-2011, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by anthonyk

I dunno, having the plaintiffs' lawyers limited to two hours seems like a win to me.

Quote:

Apple had sought to prevent the deposition altogether,

derf · 03-29-2011, 06:36 PM

Real is a crappy company that makes crappy bloated software, but (If I remember correctly) the software they created for their music was in full compliance with Apples end user agreement at the time, and fit within all the rules and laws that apple and the gov had at the time. The software update included a change to the end user agreement that made the 3rd party music against the rules. The real dispute (again I could be wrong) is that all apple products sold prior to ther change should have been exempt from the software update.

Anyway, if you want to put other 3rd party music in the ipod, just unhide folders and put the damn music in.

Porkchop · 03-29-2011, 06:49 PM

Fuck Apple, and fuck iPod.

That is all......

03-29-2011, 04:44 PM	#1
Homeslice Elitist Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: SF Bay Area Moto: Gix 750 Posts: 11,351	Steve Jobs owned I figured this article would pass muster here. Big companies shouldn't be hated on unless they're Apple. NEW YORK \| Tue Mar 22, 2011 2:23pm EDT NEW YORK (Reuters) - Apple Inc. Chief Executive Steve Jobs, who is out on medical leave, has been ordered by a federal magistrate to answer questions from plaintiffs' lawyers in an antitrust lawsuit related to his company's iTunes business. U.S. Magistrate Judge Howard Lloyd, based in San Jose, California, ruled that lawyers representing the plaintiffs in the suit may question Jobs for a total of two hours. He issued the ruling on Monday. Apple could appeal the ruling to a district judge, but it would likely have to make a case that the magistrate "made a big mistake," said Professor David Levine at University of California Hastings College of the Law. An Apple spokeswoman declined to comment, and attorneys for the plaintiffs did not respond to requests for comment. In the class-action lawsuit, a group of consumers say Apple created a music-downloading monopoly with its iPod player and iTunes store. At issue is a piece of software called Fairplay that allowed only music bought on iTunes to be played on the iPod, according to the complaint. One competitor, RealNetworks Inc, responded in 2004 by introducing a new technology that would allow customers to play music downloaded from its site on their iPods. Apple quickly announced a software upgrade to iTunes that once more blocked music from RealNetworks, the complaint charges. "The court finds that Jobs has unique, non-repetitive, first hand knowledge about Apple's software updates in October 2004 that rendered the RealNetworks's digital music files once again inoperable with iPods," Lloyd wrote in his ruling. The ruling comes amid intense questions about Jobs' health and whereabouts. Earlier this month an energetic but thin Jobs resurfaced to unveil Apple's new iPad. His appearance helped reassure investors and fans worried about what his absence might mean for the company. Apple failed to provide specific examples of how a deposition of Jobs would constitute "undue hardship," the plaintiffs wrote in a court filing last December. Lloyd said the deposition of Jobs would be limited to questions about the back-and-forth with RealNetworks in 2004. Apple had sought to prevent the deposition altogether, while the plaintiffs asked to be allowed a broader inquiry. "By limiting the scope of the deposition, the judge is trying to avoid using this as some sort of tool for embarrassment or annoyance," Levine said. Should a district judge uphold Lloyd's ruling, Levine said it would be extremely difficult for either side to appeal further. The case is in re Apple iPod iTunes antitrust litigation, Case No. 05-00037, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California. Apple is involved in a host of other lawsuits, both as a plaintiff and defendant, ranging from disputes over patents to antitrust allegations. On Monday, Apple sued Amazon.com Inc in a bid to stop the online retailer from improperly using its APP STORE trademark, according to a court filing. (Reporting by Paul Thomasch in New York, Dan Levine in San Francisco and Sakthi Prasad in Bangalore; Editing by Gerald E. McCormick and Derek Caney)

03-29-2011, 04:52 PM	#2
Avatard Crotch Rocket Curmudgeon Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Here to integrity Moto: Li'l red baby Ninja Posts: 7,482	Totally valid, and furthermore, totally ironic, given that Real is a stinking pile of shit no morals fucking company itself. __________________ Insert free thought here.

03-29-2011, 06:36 PM	#9
derf token jewboy Join Date: Nov 2008 Moto: CBR 900, KLR ugly ass duckling, Gas Man Posts: 10,799	Real is a crappy company that makes crappy bloated software, but (If I remember correctly) the software they created for their music was in full compliance with Apples end user agreement at the time, and fit within all the rules and laws that apple and the gov had at the time. The software update included a change to the end user agreement that made the 3rd party music against the rules. The real dispute (again I could be wrong) is that all apple products sold prior to ther change should have been exempt from the software update. Anyway, if you want to put other 3rd party music in the ipod, just unhide folders and put the damn music in. __________________

03-29-2011, 06:49 PM	#10
Porkchop 125GP Champion Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Worthington, OH Moto: Empty Garage Posts: 3,418	Fuck Apple, and fuck iPod. That is all...... __________________ *Coming soon? 2010 Ducati Monster 696 - Sold 1984 Honda VF500F - Sold 1999 Yamaha R6 - Sold

03-29-2011, 05:15 PM	#3
anthonyk WERA White Plate Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Austin, TX Moto: '01 Aprilia Falco Posts: 1,041	Owned?

03-29-2011, 05:36 PM	#6
anthonyk WERA White Plate Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Austin, TX Moto: '01 Aprilia Falco Posts: 1,041	I dunno, having the plaintiffs' lawyers limited to two hours seems like a win to me.