decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Remember Google | 627 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Remember Google
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 01 2012 @ 07:02 PM EDT
Isn't that all a rather silly hypothesis ? It would really
be most unwise of any company to get itself into a state of
conflict with the courts themselves. This is a no-win for
apple and if it is, as seems to be the case, just an example
of apple trying to be too smart for their own good then it's
going to be fun watching them get brought down to earth
rather emphatically.

Make no mistake. The courts will prevail. Maybe its
difficult for some americans to understand, but the high
courts in the EU won't tolerate gaming the system or
contempt of court. What apple is doing is playing a very
dangerous game that they cannot win. It has to do with the
rule of law, and no legal system will allow itself to be
undermined by a bunch of juvenile delinquents, even if they
have loads of cash in the bank.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Remember Google
Authored by: cricketjeff on Thursday, November 01 2012 @ 08:05 PM EDT
Yes Apple could decide to pull out of Europe, of course they could, but then
Europe is a rather large market, bigger than the USA, this isn't a UK court it's
an EU court that happens to be physically in London. Apple are fighting hard to
remain number one in smartphones (actually they are already #2 but only by
numbers) and they love being the world's most valuable company. Pulling out of
Europe would relegate them from those positions very fast.
And who else would be hurt? European Apple fans of course and ...

Samsung would be happy, Google would be happy, the court wouldn't care,
governments wouldn't care.

Apple can't win,

---
There is nothing in life that doesn't look better after a good cup of tea.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Remember Google
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, November 02 2012 @ 04:14 AM EDT

Total assets US$ 176.064 billion (2012)
Total equity US$ 118.210 billion (2012)

Look at the "Total Equity" figure. Apple has essentially no debt, and huge income.
I'm seeing:

Total Liabilities = Total Assets - Total Equity
Total Liabilities ≈ $176 bn - $118 bn ≈ $ 58 bn
ie total DEBTS of approx $58bn

(Otherwise I've just wasted the last 9 months studying bookkeeping and accountancy.)

So how do you see "essentially no debt" with total liabilities of about $58bn (about half of the total equity figure)?

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )