A US District Court has criticized Apple's approach to interpreting a court injunction regarding its App Store policies, asserting that a strict, literal reading is insufficient. The court deemed Apple's argument naive, emphasizing that the injunction's intent extends beyond its brief text to a more comprehensive 180-page order. The findings indicate a potentially precarious position for Apple as it struggles to align its practices with legal expectations, highlighting the tension between legal compliance and the broader goals of fair market competition.
"First, it is ludicrous to expect any court to repeat the contents of a 180-page order issued in conjunction with a simultaneously issued one-paragraph injunction."
"Second, even limited to the four corners of the Injunction, Apple violated the literal text."
Collection
[
|
...
]