Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!feeder2.feed.ams11.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!diablo1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Marion <marion@facts.com>
Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone,comp.sys.mac.system,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: I'm shocked: The Court finds Apple & its executives & its lawyers lied under oath
Date: Fri, 2 May 2025 01:30:40 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: BWH Usenet Archive (https://usenet.blueworldhosting.com)
Message-ID: <vv177v$28n3$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>
References: <vuujgl$1ucm$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com> <xn0p5ab5v5z4w7o003@reader443.eternal-september.org>
Injection-Date: Fri, 2 May 2025 01:30:40 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com;
	logging-data="74467"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blueworldhosting.com"
User-Agent: Alan Baker insisted this line can not be changed
Cancel-Lock: sha1:EKAzAFQxh01XdDvlsc5MyY7dPWw= sha256:AR35G388wkVUOhr6P9C81SqX9w5GSyX3fA5MlkTBKmI=
	sha1:5x1fXUSMDMS5+GHELLx/OsV/iT0= sha256:/kFBPB03TV70uaEWRfsVrwDwMSKAb9VParkVutEYv2I=

On Thu, 1 May 2025 20:52:32 -0000 (UTC), badgolferman wrote :


> The judge says Apple lied under oath and continued charging fees even
> though ordered not to do so.  How will this be spinned?  We know Apple
> will continue to lie, but surely the Apple apologists won't.  Are they
> even embarrassed by what Apple has done?

Apparently the judge had asked for internal documents before making the
decision, where after the judge checked the documents, all hell broke loose
on Apple (as it's rare for civil contempt to be considered criminal).

To his credit, Phil Schiller apparently suggested following the law.

Apparently the documents showed Schiller was overruled by Tim Cook, & then,
"To hide the truth", VP of Finance, Alex Roman, "outright lied under oath".

The judge ruled that the evidence showed "Apple knew exactly what it was
doing" which is why the newly re-enforced injunction is "non negotiable".

What I find revealing is how bold Apple's disdain for the law is.
It will be interesting what happens with the upcoming criminal case.

Last time Apple was forced to publish, for a month, they lied to the world,
but the minute that month was up, Apple trolls said it didn't happen.