this post was submitted on 01 May 2025
399 points (98.8% liked)
Technology
69545 readers
3671 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I don't understand what that has to do with anything? It doesn't cost either of them anything to enforce a ruling the court already made.
To be clear, I'm not defending anyone here...
Apple likely delayed it multiple times.
They delayed the enforcement of a ruling? I don't think even they have that power.
sure they can, all they had to do was ignore the ruling
That doesn't delay the enforcement of the ruling.
What enforcement?
The enforcement outlined in the OP?
No what I am asking you is what evidence of enforcement do you see anywhere here?
Apple was ordered by the courts to do something, they blatantly ignored it and doubled down. At no point it seems the courts were enforcing their initial ruling. It took the defendants to bring this back to court again. What's stopping Apple from not doing anything and ignoring the courts again?
The evidence I see is the article linked in the OP.
If that happened, it's absent from the article in the OP.
There is clearly NO enforcement in there... maybe we think "enforcement" are different things here
I don't know how you can not see enforcement. It's in the headline of the article.
"Judge in Epic v. Apple bans Apple from charging commission on purchases made outside App Store"
That is what the judge ordered, who is forcing Apple to comply? forcing them to follow the ruling is the definition of "enforcement", not the ruling itself
And the reason I am second guessing is that the court had already ruled against Apple and they just ignored that and doubled down on the bad behaviour
The...judge?
Whatever, this is a dumb argument.
is it? because we are talking about the difference between a lawful society and anarchy.
Looks like you don't understand the point and now are getting defensive. Have a nice day bud
Yes that's definitely what's happening and not that you don't understand and are trying to do a "gotcha" for internet points.
Internet points?... sorry, I did not realize you were 12
Sorry, was I the one making dumb arguments for no reason? Oh no, that was you. And now you've further devolved to childish insults so you're going to be blocked. Goodbye.
Oh no!... anyways