Apple trial now in the hands of the jurors

Apple trial now in the hands of the jurors

The much-publicised antitrust class action trial against Apple is now in the hands of the jury. 

Jurors will have to decide whether the Cupertino company deliberately blocked iPod owners from downloading music purchased from stores other than iTunes to their devices. 

There’s no doubt that iTunes 7.1 did cause some users to have music purchased from stores like RealNetworks wiped from their iPods, but the question is whether that was the actual purpose of the software upgrade. 

The trial, which took place in Oakland, was bound to make headlines partly because it involved Apple and partly because of the sum that Apple may have to pay if the plaintiffs are successful (around $1 billion). 

The fact that Steve Jobs delivered a testimony from beyond the grave, that his emails to other Apple executive shed more light on his mindset and that the trial very nearly ended up without any featured plaintiffs just added to the drama and ensured continued coverage. 

What’s questionable is whether the outcome of this particular trial will affect Apple in any way. Back in 2006 Apple was on the rise, but its future was by no means guaranteed. Jobs was doing all he could to preserve the company’s lead in the music space whilst he started work on landmark products like the iPhone and the iPad. 

Today’s Apple, led by Tim Cook, is a very different company. It is under a huge amount of scrutiny - as any company that has - depending on how the stock goes - the biggest market cap in the world should be. 

Apple also learned a lesson from its loss in the iBook price fixing trial and, since the advent of apps on its iOS devices, has opened up the field to competing services, first of all Google, but also Amazon with the Kindle app and many, many players in the music space. 

Bill Isaacson, Apple’s attorney, stated in the closing arguments: “This is all made up. It’s lawyer argument,” whilst the attorney for the plaintiffs, Patrick Coughlin, stated that Apple believed it had the right to control and choose what users could play on a device they had bought and owned. 

(Andrea Leonelli)