OSNews

Thom, go back to bed with your lazy reporting. You can speak to the doc Florian Mueller produced but can't speak to the article he wrote to accompany it? WTF? Skewing the view maybe?

Florian wrote, "Apple wouldn't be the first defendant in Germany to pursue a tactic called "Flucht in die Säumnis" ("resorting to a default judgment"). Many defendants play this game after they have failed (for their own fault) to meet a deadline for an answer to a complaint. In that case, the problem they face is that any arguments they'd have liked to present would no longer be admissible if presented only at the time of a hearing (on the grounds of being untimely). By simply letting the plaintiff win a default judgment, a defendant preserves his ability to present all of his arguments in the appeal. But this has cost implications (which are less than secondary in this case given what's at stake) and comes with the risk of a default judgment that is preliminarily enforceable."

Also, Apple responded to the story advising, " We just got the following statement from Apple regarding the ruling:
"This is a procedural issue, and has nothing to do with the merits of the case. It does not affect our ability to sell products or do business in Germany at this time."
So, it appears our iDevice-loving German friends have nothing to worry about, at least for now."

So please Thom, tell the whole story in its proper context, or just simply take yourself back to bed.

Edited 2011-11-05 04:10 UTC