Authored by: yacc on Saturday, November 10 2012 @ 09:05 AM EST |
On the philosophical side, this is a risk every professional
shares.
Or as it's told in IT, usually the customer just believes
that he knows what he needs, the art is delivering what he
needs while he thinks that he got what he asked for, ...[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 10 2012 @ 10:15 AM EST |
I think it has been said that the language used in the
original statement was identifiably American implying it was
sent over from Apple HQ. Ones assumes the UK lawyers told them
they could get in trouble for running it but overruled them.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- Makes sense - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, November 10 2012 @ 01:12 PM EST
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, November 11 2012 @ 03:02 AM EST |
But isn't the contempt more serious if the lawyers advice regarding the court
order is ignored?
Shouldn't the lawyers notify the court that their order was fully explained to
the client and the client chose to 'interpret it'?
Shouldn't the judge order that the CEO of Apple UK be present to explain why the
courts orders were willfully ignored and why contempt charges shouldn't be
filed?
Personally, i'd like to see a tougher approach taken by the courts as the class
of lawyers acting on Apple UK behalf are at the top of their field so their
advice should not be willfully ignored in such a contemptuous manner by a
client.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|