“Scold” is the right word. Reading the decision, I’m struck by how many ways the Court found to say that Bromwich had crossed the line.
I think the word everyone is looking for here is: “Crooked”.
Where Apple’s antitrust monitor crossed the line
“Scold” is the right word. Reading the decision, I’m struck by how many ways the Court found to say that Bromwich had crossed the line.
I think the word everyone is looking for here is: “Crooked”.
What really bothers me about this is, who’s the more crooked one in this situation? Apple, for allegedly wishing to raise prices of ebooks in order to create a more healthy and competitive ebooks market at the cost of consumers spending a few dollars per book, or judge Denise Cote and this scumbag of a lawyer? The govt certainly has no qualms with costing citizens just a few more dollars to make something better, they even do it to citizens while making things worse. Funny who’s the one being punished. The courts and this lawyer are acting more like a mob gang than a purveyor of the law. Sad how the world works.
The Antitrust monitor didn’t cross the line. He was on the wrong side of it from the word go.
This concise summary is right on the money.
The monitor made a new line and crossed it. He had a job to do (right or wrong), yet he exercised additional putative damages … because.