Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 01 2012 @ 03:20 PM EDT |
I was enjoying the mordant wit I relished in the late lamented Punch,
then came to the part where El Reg is held up in court as a
sample of Apple's malfeasance. Oh dear, it'll take more than
a 999 call to put this fire out.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, November 02 2012 @ 02:06 AM EDT |
Most amusing. One additional point for those unfamiliar with
court procedure in the Commonwealth. If the respondent is
asked to lead by the bench, the judges think the
applicants/appellants have an almost unassailable case on
the papers that have been filed. It's rare in my experience. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: soronlin on Friday, November 02 2012 @ 09:07 AM EDT |
Thanks, a most amusing read.
I note that it confirms what we had gleaned from the ambiguous media reports:
Apple have 24 hours to remove the offending notice and 48 hours to replace it
with something else.
I notice that they took probably 23 hours and fifty five minutes to comply with
the first part. Expect to see the replacement at precisely 10am GMT on Saturday.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, November 02 2012 @ 09:59 AM EDT |
If all the Apple fans hadn't made such a big deal about how Apple was "so
clever" in how it responded, then they might have gotten away with it!
Eat your crows indeed :)[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|