Is the iPhone a banana? (European court precendent) | Hacker News Reader

Is the iPhone a banana? (European court precendent)

theplanis.com

25 pointsnotauser13 comments

In US law, I'd think the more relevant precedent would be US vs. Microsoft. Judge Jackson wrote a lengthy decision procedure for when a platform is a monopoly.

Microsoft's position was that Windows is not a monopoly, because customers had the option of buying a Macintosh instead of a PC. Jackson threw that argument out (and Posner let that opinion stand in appeal, IIRC).

I think this is the relevant bit. http://www.justice.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm#ii

IANAL.

You know what would be embarassing? If a company selling web-based project planning solutions had broken links in their website. Especially a link that was at the bottom of every page on their company blog, and was the link that was supposed to take you to the page about the product they sell.

You are right, that is pretty embarrassing. It slipped through when I did a template update and I have now fixed it.

Thanks for the heads up.

I feel slightly bad about phrasing it in a snarky way now. Thanks for updating it, though :)

I think there should be grounds for anticompetitive behaviour.

Whether I bought my iPhone outright, or whether I'm tied into a contract for 18-24 months, there isn't a sense of competition because I have no reasonable alternative to purchasing from Apple's App Store.

The post about prospectus credibility is not bad: http://theplanis.com/blog/latestage/

Thanks. I actually read the investor update for that particular prospectus recently.

Generally it seems to be working out, and as predicted the technology has very little to do with it. In fact one of the customers is proposing to license it and then use none of the technical solution, instead building their own in house.

The power of golf in the technology business at work :-)

the technology has very little to do with it

"amateurs talk strategy, professionals talk logistics" ...

power of golf

Those of us on the "a good walk spoiled" side are missing out then (ah well, there's wining and dining ;-)

I wonder how much of that is a result of European risk aversion and relative economic rigidity, focusing on credentials, legal barriers to competition (as opposed to building a better product), "connections and pedigree". It all sounds like big corporation CYA behaviour where the returns are low and predictable and you just need to scale, rather than an investment with big potential for upside and concomitant appetite for risk.

But like he says, it's only one data point.

This investor was an American (and a red-meat eating, cigar smoking, boot wearing Republican too, for what it's worth).

> European risk aversion and relative economic rigidity, focusing on credentials, legal barriers to competition

This is racism.

> It all sounds like big corporation CYA behaviour

And this is illogical. I mean, if Europe is the risk averse one, why is the acronym "cover your ass"? It should be "couvrir ton derriere", or at least "arse!"

FWIW, I'm an Irishman living in the UK, and I judge what I see.

>> European risk aversion and relative economic rigidity, focusing on credentials, legal barriers to competition

>This is racism.

This is an ad hominem argument. The original poster's comment sounds more like a statement about how he sees European law.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com