Problem is, that when GM claims that they've created the perpetual motion machine and they sell it as a perpetual motion machine, then it better be a perpetual motion machine or they're misrepresenting their product.
If Apple misrepresented the claims of its product to its customers, then further exploited those customers by suggesting that they need to buy a new freaking $300 ipod to replace a $50 component, then the lawyers representing the defendants in this action are serving an important role in the economy - which is to provide proper checks on business.
Caveat emptor to the extent that information is symmetric.
Slashdot Mirror
Problem is, that when GM claims that they've created the perpetual motion machine and they sell it as a perpetual motion machine, then it better be a perpetual motion machine or they're misrepresenting their product. If Apple misrepresented the claims of its product to its customers, then further exploited those customers by suggesting that they need to buy a new freaking $300 ipod to replace a $50 component, then the lawyers representing the defendants in this action are serving an important role in the economy - which is to provide proper checks on business. Caveat emptor to the extent that information is symmetric.