3 ms·
"Mr. Roman did not stop there, however. He also testified that up until January 16, 2024, Apple had no idea what fee it would impose on linked-out purchases […]
by ransom1538 1y ago
"Mr. Roman did not stop there, however. He also testified that up until January 16, 2024, Apple had no idea what fee it would impose on linked-out purchases […] Another lie under oath: contemporaneous business documents reveal that on the contrary, the main components of Apple’s plan, including the 27% commission, were determined in July 2023."
Basically, the current civil court model is 1) go to court with a case 2) demand to read internal memos of the defendants, 3) put people on the stand and walk through everything in these memos.
It is coercion. They want you to settle, or all your personal info goes online.
- Firaxus 1y agoThe article mentions that apple had the opportunity to correct the record and did not. These are multi billion and trillion dollar companies, they should be held to a high standard.
- 10000truths 1y agoThe demands for internal memos aren't arbitrary, they follow due process of law. Plaintiff serves a subpoena. Defendant can contest the subpoena by filing a motion to quash with the judge, who either approves or denies the motion. But in a case like this where the defendant is a large corporation (or representative thereof) and the subpoenaed information is relevant to the facts of the case, the judge is likely to honor the subpoena.