"Cue freely admits Apple worked with publishers to fix the prices readers paid for ebooks, but argues Apple was being unfairly singled out when all it really wanted to do was bring electronic copies to the (paying) masses."
So by that reckoning Lee Harvey Oswalds lawyers could have said that, yes, he shot JFK but he was really doing us all a favour because JFK was a bit of a troublemaker\man whore and nearly caused WW3 over the Cuban missile crisis\drove Marilyn Monroe to suicide so by killing him, LHO was helping to secure world peace\chastity for movie starlets.
Seems airtight to me.
Breaking the law is breaking the law, fictional "good" (I use the world VERY loosely when in the same sentence as Apple) intentions mean nothing. How can you possibly expect to have a court decision overturned when you simply admit that your company commited a criminal act, "Cue freely admits Apple worked with publishers to fix the prices", and then try to justify it by saying it was for the altruistic\humanitarian reasons we all know Apple are famous for?
And I agree with Tromos. Give them a proper fine, $4.5 billion minimum, and 50% of their book sales profits for 5 years. Also go after the publishers and gift them with similar fines.
These bell ends only care about money so they need to be hit hard in the only place it hurts. Only when they are finally hit hard enough that it hurts will they start to change.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
