“A U.S. judge on Tuesday agreed to not extend the term of a court-appointed monitor assigned to review Apple Inc’s antitrust compliance program despite the difficult environment the monitor faced in dealing with the iPad maker,” Nate Raymond reports for Reuters.
“The decision from U.S. District Judge Denise Cote in Manhattan came a day after the U.S. Justice Department recommended not extending the appointment of Michael Bromwich, who was named monitor after Apple was found liable for conspiring to raise e-book prices,” Raymond reports. “Cote said Bromwich had “persevered and made numerous recommendations to Apple for the improvement of its antitrust compliance program,” the vast majority of which Apple implemented. ‘The monitor has ably performed a significant public service in a difficult environment,’ Cote wrote. The decision means that Bromwich’s two-year term will end on Friday.”
Raymond reports, “Apple is considering whether to appeal that decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.”
MacDailyNews Take: Michael BromwichCote is a vacant-eyed D.O.J. puppet, Bromwich is a nasty little troll, and the whole travesty won’t be set right until the U.S. Supreme Court voids it completely.
The D.O.J. should be required to pay Apple back in full for the wasted time and overpayments to the meddlesome, needless PITA.
The so called “monitor” was appointed to steal apple’s secrets. The accusations and the trial were way to weird mostly because Amazon was a lot worse in fixing prices against the general public, but the judge didn’t see any interesting information to stole from Amazon that is why they just went against Apple to have an excuse to have an spy legally in apple’s headquarters.
Maybe Cote is just trying to come off as a not-so-bad judge. So she doesn’t look as evil when the verdict is overturned and the DOJ has to make good to Apple for damages…
I really hope Apple does take this all the way to the Supreme Court. Regardless of the outcome, a national discussion needs to take place regarding the intent of anti-trust law and how it plays with new business models of the 21st century.
I am no legal expert. But while what the DoJ did was clearly wrong in any business or ethical sense, many lawyers appear to agree that Apple did in fact break the law. If that is true (and I’m not saying it is) then the law is wrong. I’m hopeful that a Supreme Court ruling will prompt a national discussion that will drive congressional action to change the law.
Apple is said by no less than TF International Securities’ uber-analyst Ming-Chi Kuo to be basing the forthcoming 5G-capable “iPhone 12” design on the…
Santa Clara University students, faculty, and staff with Apple iPhones or Apple Watches can now “go mobile” with student IDs on iPhone and Apple Watch…
Just at the time when Apple engineers usually jet off to Asia to perfect the production of this fall’s next-gen iPhones, former employees and supply chain experts…
FARCE!!!
bet he wasn’t invited to the Christmas party.
Bet he dusts his broom on Cote for getting him the gig
The so called “monitor” was appointed to steal apple’s secrets. The accusations and the trial were way to weird mostly because Amazon was a lot worse in fixing prices against the general public, but the judge didn’t see any interesting information to stole from Amazon that is why they just went against Apple to have an excuse to have an spy legally in apple’s headquarters.
Meanwhile, Amazon’s monopoly grows to 80% of the market. This has to be one of the dumbest cases ever.
Hey Bromwitch, dont let the door hit your ass on the way out 😝
That last line made it sound as if Apple was considering repealing the decision to end Bromwich’s term..
He’s still a disgusting Pig. 😡
Maybe Cote is just trying to come off as a not-so-bad judge. So she doesn’t look as evil when the verdict is overturned and the DOJ has to make good to Apple for damages…
I really hope Apple does take this all the way to the Supreme Court. Regardless of the outcome, a national discussion needs to take place regarding the intent of anti-trust law and how it plays with new business models of the 21st century.
I am no legal expert. But while what the DoJ did was clearly wrong in any business or ethical sense, many lawyers appear to agree that Apple did in fact break the law. If that is true (and I’m not saying it is) then the law is wrong. I’m hopeful that a Supreme Court ruling will prompt a national discussion that will drive congressional action to change the law.