Will not interfere in Apple deals with movies, TV, music however
Judge Denise Cote, who presided over the e-book price-fixing trial between Apple and the US Department of Justice, has softened or eliminated a number of restrictions recommended by the DOJ since it emerged victorious in the trial; however, she said in a hearing on Tuesday that she does plan to require Apple to hire an external monitor whose job would be to review the company's internal antitrust compliance program.
Amazon becomes as much a focus as tactics used by Apple
While nobody knows how Judge Denice Cote will rule in the two-week e-book price-fixing trial brought against Apple by the US Department of Justice, everyone who has been keeping tabs on the trial as it unfolded knows one thing: Judge Cote has been given more to consider after hearing Apple's vigorous defense of its actions and the performance of witnesses in the trial -- from both sides of the case. The same judge who had offered a pre-trial opinion that the DOJ would likely prove conspiracies said it all at the close: "things change."
DOJ claims Cue, Jobs discussed deal with Amazon to stay out
In further testimony on the last day this week of the Department of Justice e-book price-fixing trial, Apple Senior Vice President of Internet Software and Services Eddy Cue told the judge that Steve Jobs had been initially opposed to the idea that became the iBookstore -- not believing that the tablet would be an ideal device for reading compared to dedicated e-readers such as the Kindle. Cue said he was responsible for persuading Jobs by telling him of the benefits of e-books on the iPad, which won Jobs over.
Doubling of business keeps Apple at 20 percent of e-book marketshare
Such is the explosive growth of the e-book market that Apple, as revealed during the ongoing price-fixing trial brought by the US Department of Justice, grew its iBooks business by 100 percent in 2012 alone, and yet that was only enough for it to maintain its place at 20 percent share of the overall market -- suggesting that Amazon also saw a doubling of its e-book business that year as well. Apple has maintained that 20 percent share more or less since it entered the market in 2010.
Google called itself a neutral third party, judge questions impartiality
Magistrage Judge Paul S. Grewal, the judge in charge of pre-trial discovery issues in the second Apple vs. Samsung patent trial, has ruled that Google must provide Apple search terms used in the unearthing of documents related to the case. Google is now compelled to "produce search terms and a list of custodians that Google used in response to requests for production Apple served on it." The seven-page ruling makes a point clear -- Apple wasn't seeking further discovery, it just expressed concern on the information Google pulled for discovery.
Apple decries quality of documents returned by search engine
As part of the 2014 Apple versus Samsung smartphone patent trial motions, Apple has filed a request to compel discovery from Google. In support of the motion, Apple filed a reply brief saying that the response from the search engine was poor, and that it "wants to work cooperatively with Google to correct these flaws," implying that Google has a broken automated search process, or that it is purposely using poor search terms to seek internal copyright documents which could be relevant to the upcoming trial.
Samsung asking 700 questions, Apple 49
Late Wednesday afternoon, Apple and Samsung filed their prospective juror screening questions for their US District Court patent dispute scheduled for the end of this month. People selected from the jury pool to serve on the Apple and Samsung jury will have to answer 700 questions put forth by Samsung, and 49 by Apple, unless Judge Lucy Koh orders some narrowing. Samsung's questionnaire spans 40 pages, and Apple's covers six. The discrepancy in the size of the questionnaires may be an attempt by Samsung to bewilder potential jurors who lack strong technical abilities, or could be a simple attempt to delay the trial further -- behavior the company has already been punished for engaging in.