• Your favorite

    Apple

    ,

    iPhone

    ,

    iPad

    ,

    iOS

    ,
    Jailbreak
    , and
    Cydia
    site.
  • Apple's Antitrust Lawsuit May Lack a Plaintiff


    A major development was made in the class-action lawsuit involving Apple’s iPod and iTunes with new court documents revealing that Apple is questioning whether a class even exists. A letter to the presiding Judge Yvonne Gonzales Rogers notes that both plaintiffs named in the case haven’t provided evidence that showcases they owned an iPod purchased within the suit’s effective September 2006 to March 2009 time period.

    For those of you who didn’t know, Apple is accused of creating a monopoly with its FairPlay digital rights management (DRM), the iPod and the iTunes Music Store. As mentioned by the plaintiffs, the class includes individuals and businesses who bought the iPod classic, iPod shuffle, iPod touch or iPod nano models between the dates of September 12, 2006 and March 31, 2009.

    Apple, in its letter to Judge Gonzales Rogers, said it had researched the serial numbers of plaintiff Mariana Rosen’s iPod and found the device was actually purchased in July 2009. Court documents show Rosen bought a 15 GB iPod and a 30 GB “video iPod” for personal use as well as an iPod mini as a gift. Furthermore, the second plaintiff, Melanie Tucker, is asserting a 32 GB iPod touch purchased in 2010, a 20 GB iPod purchased in April 2005 and an “iPod video.”

    Judge Gonzales Rogers had the following to say regarding the matter:

    I am concerned that I don't have a plaintiff. That's a problem.
    As of right now the jurist plans to look into the situation independently while plaintiffs’ attorney, Bonny Sweeny, said she had not seen the documents provided by Apple and would respond later. We’ll have to see how the case unfolds but as of right now, it looks like Apple may be off the hook.

    Source: The New York Times
    This article was originally published in forum thread: Apple's Antitrust Lawsuit May Lack a Plaintiff started by Akshay Masand View original post
    Comments 2 Comments
    1. SpiderManAPV's Avatar
      SpiderManAPV -
      This whole case is so dumb. Both sides. Would be a fitting way for it to end.
    1. Jahooba's Avatar
      Jahooba -