We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
2. It's not exactly politically motivated but politics is split on anti-trust itself. Anti-trust is very political at its heart as well. It originated to stop economic power from becoming political power. Then certain a view overtook that anti-trust doesn't serve its own goal (Read Richard Posner or a short summary of his views) and now we are back again to the point of origin as originalists have taken over. So antitrust objectives move.
3. This lawsuit is largely affecting how much money Apple makes for its software and not hardware. Apple is slowly moving from a hardware company to a software company. As part of that move, these legal interventions are troublesome for the company.
4. Refer to the answer above. If anything, to offset its lower software revenue, Apple product prices may witness price increases. Who knows. They have quite a captive audience. Apple has never reduced prices on anything. It treats itself as a lifestyle or luxury brand. The aspirational lap it up. Any such effect on prices etc. is a long way away in litigation.
5. Errr ... What? Don't be vain. Don't be envious. Law firm bros and gals are mostly depressed. Trust me. Speaking of which, an Android flagship costs as much as an iPhone. In the case of folding phones, even more.
2. Is this case politically motivated, because of the US elections?
3. Will this lawsuit result in Apple phones costing less?
4. Consequently, will Apple phones lose their brand value, if they cost the same as a Samsung or Xiaomi?
5. And, consequently, will T1 law firm bros fall into serious depression, because they can't show off their Apple gadgets and impress others?