3 ms·

What was the ruling by the other judge, and was it brought up in Epic Games v. Apple

scarface_74 3y ago
Why does it matter? One case was about collusion between Apple and the book publishers and the other was about whether Apple had a monopoly on the App Store. Why would the judge care about the other case? What precedence did the first cass set on the other?
- Apocryphon 3y ago
  To answer the question: "So did the Epic judge ignore the ruling of another judge where Apple was accused of behaving monopolistic in regards to the App Store?" If the judge didn't care about the other case, then they are plainly ignoring the ruling of the other judge, thus substantiating my assertion that "Judges are actively ignoring each other’s rulings these days, what matters is the newest case that will ensue"
  - scarface_74 3y ago
    Really? So are you saying that the judge in the Epic case about the App Store should have taken into account a completely unrelated case just because it involved Apple? To what end?
    - Apocryphon 3y ago
      Sounds like the answer to "So did the Epic judge ignore the ruling of another judge where Apple was accused of behaving monopolistic in regards to the App Store?" is a NO, then.
      - scarface_74 3y ago
        You still don’t get it. Apple in no way shape or form had a monopoly on ebooks in 2013. There is a huge difference between monopolistic practices and collusion. You and I could have two competing taco stands in Nebraska and if we colluded to fix prices that would be illegal collusion even though it isn’t monopolistic. This is why HN users make bad keyboard lawyers.
        Apocryphon 3y ago
        So what other ruling did the Epic judge not ignore or ignore? I don’t care about Apple being a monopoly or not in the context of this conversation. I am trying to establish judges ignoring precedence.
        scarface_74 3y ago
        What other ruling did the Epic judge ignore? She ignored the trial of the person who kidnapped Lindbergh’s baby, the OJ trial and literally millions of other cases that had nothing to do with whether Apple had a monopoly on the App Store. Even if there had been trial in a different district than where she SSD working and it didn’t make it the Supreme Court, there is no “precedence” to ignore.
        Apocryphon 3y ago
        Oh, okay. Thanks

Why does it matter? One case was about collusion between Apple and the book publishers and the other was about whether Apple had a monopoly on the App Store. Why would the judge care about the other case? What precedence did the first cass set on the other?

Apocryphon 3y ago
To answer the question: "So did the Epic judge ignore the ruling of another judge where Apple was accused of behaving monopolistic in regards to the App Store?" If the judge didn't care about the other case, then they are plainly ignoring the ruling of the other judge, thus substantiating my assertion that "Judges are actively ignoring each other’s rulings these days, what matters is the newest case that will ensue"
- scarface_74 3y ago
  Really? So are you saying that the judge in the Epic case about the App Store should have taken into account a completely unrelated case just because it involved Apple? To what end?
  - Apocryphon 3y ago
    Sounds like the answer to "So did the Epic judge ignore the ruling of another judge where Apple was accused of behaving monopolistic in regards to the App Store?" is a NO, then.
    - scarface_74 3y ago
      You still don’t get it. Apple in no way shape or form had a monopoly on ebooks in 2013. There is a huge difference between monopolistic practices and collusion. You and I could have two competing taco stands in Nebraska and if we colluded to fix prices that would be illegal collusion even though it isn’t monopolistic. This is why HN users make bad keyboard lawyers.
      - Apocryphon 3y ago
        So what other ruling did the Epic judge not ignore or ignore? I don’t care about Apple being a monopoly or not in the context of this conversation. I am trying to establish judges ignoring precedence.
        scarface_74 3y ago
        What other ruling did the Epic judge ignore? She ignored the trial of the person who kidnapped Lindbergh’s baby, the OJ trial and literally millions of other cases that had nothing to do with whether Apple had a monopoly on the App Store. Even if there had been trial in a different district than where she SSD working and it didn’t make it the Supreme Court, there is no “precedence” to ignore.
        Apocryphon 3y ago
        Oh, okay. Thanks