Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple Antitrust Case Finds New Consumer Plaintiff

Posted by timothy on from the you-may-have-already-won dept.

An anonymous reader writes Class action against Apple is set to continue after 65-year-old amateur figure skater Barbara Bennett decided she would volunteer to represent consumers in the faltering antitrust case. U.S. district judge Yvonne Gonzalez-Rogers is reportedly satisfied that Bennett qualifies as a class member, telling attorneys that they 'were on the right track.' Bennett offered to volunteer in the case after reading an online news story which suggested that the suit was floundering due to a lack of a named plaintiff after the last plaintiff was disqualified earlier this week.

9 of 39 comments (clear)

  1. Bennett, frequent volunteer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    There she is! Bennett's contributing!

  2. I hate Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    But I hate lawyers more.

    1. Re:I hate Apple by zieroh · · Score: 2

      Perhaps you need to re-examine what is important in life, then. Hate is just a waste of life.

      --
      People who say "sheeple" have about as much sophistication as an AOL user, and in fact are probably actually AOL users.
    2. Re:I hate Apple by DRJlaw · · Score: 2

      Good, we need more hate because we certainly need less life on this planet. Let's start with politicians and lawyers, first.

      As long as you people insist upon trying to control what your neighbors do, weaseling out of paying your debts, cheating the people you do business with, and making up your own rules that totally suprisingly favor whatever side you're supporting at the moment, there will be politicians and lawyers.

      The politicians are just doing what you tell them to do -- or more specifically, what the people who actually care are telling them to do. Those who sit on their ass writing meaningless missives of how it's all rigged against them without actually organizing their neighbors get what they deserve.

      The lawyers are usually trying to prevent you from being screwed by the other guys. And before you retort that lawyers are encouraging the screwing, remember that our technological surveillance state is being created by the engineers and computer scientists -- not politicians using off-the-shelf parts. You're no better. Behave yourselves and lawyers won't have clients. Then there'll be less of them.

  3. Singles ad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Me: single law firm with a pending lawsuit against a deep pockets company. Likes long walks on the beach and watching old movies.
    You: a potential plaintiff, looking for a good time and maybe more. Oh yeah, and potential big payout for both of us.

    Whatever Apple may have done, shopping for plaintiffs like this just feels wrong.

    Courtesy of Dewey, Cheatham, and Howe.

  4. Like there weren't any other competitors around by johnlcallaway · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What a bunch of BS. Apple only prevented people from loading third party music on the device they sold, not on everyone's.

    That's why I didn't buy one. I don't buy any Apple product because the company limits choice beyond what is reasonable and purely for control purposes. I have no doubt they are telling the truth, that it's because of music deals and iTunes. I can believe that Apple wanted to lock their customers into iTunes and was willing to make such deals.

    But I fail to see how this can be an antitrust issue when there were plenty of other choices that we cheaper. It was only an issue for the iDrones out there who couldn't see past their little white cases.

    BTW ... my wife had a nano. Hated iTunes. She gave it away 6 months after I gave it to her for Christmas. What a piece of crap software, I should have known better.

    --
    I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.
    1. Re:Like there weren't any other competitors around by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 4, Informative

      Apple only prevented people from loading third party music on the device they sold, not on everyone's.

      Only third party music laced with DRM. Normal mp3 files from any source have always worked seamlessly.

  5. Real news from the case by OzPeter · · Score: 3, Informative

    And if you want some real news Former iTunes Engineer Tells Court He Worked to Block Competitors

    --
    I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
  6. Re:Future lawsuits include: by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 2

    These are all physically incompatible. But an MP3 file is an MP3 file.

    Not in this case. The files in question contained Real's DRM. That's why they had to backdoor them. If they were actually standard MP3 files they would have worked without issue, and would still be working today.