Dec 2, 2014 - "Apple... will defend against allegations that it abused a monopoly position in the digital music player market as it heads to trial in a case that could cost the company about $1 billion if it loses. Opening statements are scheduled to begin on Tuesday in an Oakland, California, federal court in the long-running class action, brought by a group of individuals and businesses who purchased iPods between 2006 and 2009. They say a 2006 iTunes update dictated that iTunes music could -only- be played on iPods, unfairly blocking competing device makers. Plaintiffs are seeking about $350 million in damages, which would be automatically -tripled- under antitrust laws. Apple says the software update contained genuine product improvements, and thus should not be found anticompetitive...
The case is one of a handful of antitrust lawsuits Apple has defended over the past year. A New York federal judge found Apple liable last year over allegations it -colluded- with publishers to drive up e-book prices. Apple is appealing that ruling.
Apple was also one of several tech companies that agreed to settle claims that they -colluded- to hold down salaries by agreeing not to poach tech workers from competitors. A U.S. judge rejected that $324.5 million settlement as too small, though Apple has asked an appeals court to reinstate it.
The case headed to trial on Tuesday harks back to Apple's pre-iPhone era, when the iPod was its flagship mobile device. Several emails from Apple co-founder Steve Jobs are expected to be entered into evidence, along with short deposition excerpts of Jobs videotaped before he died..."
Apple Wins Decade-Old Suit Over iTunes Updates
Dec 16, 2014 - " A jury took about three hours to reject an antitrust lawsuit — 10 years in the making — that accused Apple of using a software update to secure a monopoly over the digital music market. The eight-member jury in federal court here unanimously determined that Apple had, in fact, used an update of the iTunes software that it issued eight years ago to deliver genuine improvements for older iPods. The verdict rendered on Tuesday wrapped up a class-action suit that had been in various courts and in various forms — and even contained various accusations — before it finally went to trial in early December. The lawsuit involved iPods sold from September 2006 to March 2009 that were able to play only songs sold in the iTunes Store or those downloaded from CDs — not music from some competing stores. Apple was accused of violating antitrust law by using a copyright management system to lock people into buying iPods rather than cheaper alternatives. The plaintiffs were seeking at least $350 million in damages, an amount that could have tripled if the jury found that Apple violated antitrust law... The jury was initially instructed to assess whether two versions of iTunes software were genuine product improvements. But the judge tossed out a claim about the second iTunes version after an economist testifying for the plaintiffs, Roger Noll from Stanford University, conceded in court that he had not assessed any impact made by that version of the software. The backdrop for the trial was an old fight between Apple and RealNetworks, an Internet media service that created a workaround to allow songs sold in its store to play on iPods and other media players. In response, Apple in 2004 issued a statement accusing RealNetworks of hacking the iPod and warning that future software updates might prevent songs sold by RealNetworks from playing on iPods. RealNetworks was not a party in the suit. In their testimony, Apple executives emphasized that iTunes software updates included security enhancements to protect iTunes music from hackers. In his videotaped deposition, Mr. Jobs said iTunes hacks subjected Apple to violating its contracts with the music companies, which could result in the labels’ withholding their music..."
Edited by AplusWebMaster, 17 December 2014 - 04:40 PM.