Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

https://daringfireball.net/linked/2025/05/09/apple-antisteering-emergency-motion

Quote

f this sounds like a new addition to the case, it is! The Takings Clause has not come up in any previous litigation precisely because Judge Gonzales Rogers’ original opinion acknowledged that Apple had the right to charge a commission; the issue under the California Unfair Competition Law was that Apple’s commission was much higher than was justified precisely because Apple foreclosed competition. To that end, what would have made much more sense would have been if Judge Gonzales Rogers lowered Apple’s proposed 27% commission to something significantly lower; to simply wipe it out completely is what prompts this discussion.

 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...