|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 26 2012 @ 12:36 PM EDT |
There is a thing under English Law called "Contempt of Court"
which carries severe penalties. Apple are in serious danger of
such a finding given their response, with the consequent risk
of punishment. This is particularly as this is an order by the
Court of Appeal which in my view (INAL but I work with the
law)has clearly been flouted. English judges do not respond
well to being disrespected.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: drakaan on Friday, October 26 2012 @ 12:36 PM EDT |
Indeed. If this were Slashdot, I would have already thrown
you some mod points.
I have two teenagers that have a habit of occasionally
obeying
the literal letter-of-the-law with things we ask of them and
effectively raising a certain finger with the effective
action
they take.
I find it every bit as aggravating seeing Apple do it.
---
'Murphy was an optimist'
-O'Toole's Commentary on Murphy's Law[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 26 2012 @ 02:12 PM EDT |
| Note: The court did not require, or even *ask* for, Apple to apologize. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, October 27 2012 @ 05:14 AM EDT |
If I were the court, I would hold Apple to be in contempt of court. The court's
order was precise: THIS is what you must say. Not this along with several
paragraphs more of self-serving "explanation" clearly intended to
dilute the impact and justify your position in the face of an unambiguous order
to "grovel".[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
