Judge Rules Apple Executive Lied Under Oath, Makes Criminal Contempt Referral
135 comments
·May 1, 2025post_break
pjmlp
Apple always has been like that, see The Cult of Mac book.
However, it appears being at the edge of bankruptcy, and having turned the ship around has made them paranoid of losing a single cent.
When Apple Store came out it was great.
I was a Nokia employee at the time, and 30% was a dream compared with what you would have to pay to phone operators, app listenings in magazines with SMS download codes, for Blackberry, Symbian, Windows CE, Pocket PC, Brew, J2ME,...
However we are now in different times, and acting as if the developers didn't have anything to do with it, it was all thanks to Apple's vision of the future, it is pure arrogance, and yes the Vision Pro was the first victim.
Here is another one, if they do really announce an UI revamp at WWDC 2025, I bet most will ignore it.
joezydeco
"In 2013 i met a very close friend of Steve Jobs and i remember saying "there's one thing i absolutely have to know, it's really important to me" he responds "okay what is it?"
I ask "what was all the money for?!" puzzled "what do you mean?" "Steve Jobs saved up like 200 billion dollars in cash at Apple, but what was it all for? what was the plan? was he going to buy AT&T? was he going to build his own telecom or make a giant spaceship? what was it for?"
And he looked at me with just the deepest and saddest eyes and spoke softly "there was no plan" "what??" "you see, Steve's previous company, NeXT, it ran out of money, so at with Apple he always wanted a pile of money on the side, just in case. and over years, the pile grew and grew and grew... and there was no plan..."
jofla_net
Totally believable. My grandmother lived though the great depression, wherein she was lucky to get an Orange at christmas. The last few decades of her life she basically was a food hoarder, pantries overflowing with canned goods, and a freezer where you never saw the back.
TYPE_FASTER
Also, Apple was down to 90 days of operating cash and almost went bankrupt in 1997.
behnamoh
> However, it appears being at the edge of bankruptcy, and having turned the ship around has made them paranoid of losing a single cent.
That was more than 20 years ago, under a totally different market condition and Apple leadership. Back then, they needed developers to turn the ship around, now they think devs need them. They's a cash cow and act like assholes.
pjmlp
There are enough people at Apple from those days, including at management levels.
jbverschoor
Might as well scrap Memorial Day, thanksgiving, and all other (holy) celebrations. It’s been ages ago
giancarlostoro
> has made them paranoid of losing a single cent.
I get the exact same feeling. They're afraid of collapsing despite being way ahead.
layer8
They aren't that much ahead anymore.
throwanem
Honestly, I think they're less jealous of money than rep. A man like Jobs would rather die under torture than be laughed at, and even almost 15 years gone, we still see his mark.
jerjerjer
> Look at how snubbing developers has worked out for the Apple Vision Pro.
I think it's mostly the lack of users. Apple snubs mobile developers all the time, but since they gate access to a large chunk of well-paying customers, developers are ready to jump through any hoops.
If there were millions of Apple Vision Pro users I'm sure the developers would have followed, but it's of course a chicken and egg situation considering Vision Pro lack of content.
modeless
It's not really a chicken and egg situation, it's more of a cost problem. It still costs $3500. Even if the next version is a third of the price it will still cost three times more than the competition.
throwanem
And if I'm buying it as a devkit I'm sure my accountant and I will find a way to write that off, anyway. $3500 isn't quite pocket change, but it is close enough to petty cash. But why do that if there's no users? And even the day-one diehards among my colleagues stopped wanting to be seen in them before long.
I think it isn't really chicken-egg, is what I'm saying. Devs were so hot to target iPhone from day one that the first or second major OS update added an entire infrastructure to make that possible. There was so much interest it made Apple back down! For the Vision Pro they had that on day one and it wasn't nearly enough to sell the thing to devs, because again, nothing did nearly enough to sell the thing to users.
chmod775
What killed the Vision Pro is the complete lack of support for the two main things people use VR for. Productivity is a distant third behind the likes of VR Chat and pornography. If Apple managed to capture only 1% of VR Chat's monthly userbase, they would've tripled their pathetic sales numbers.
Apple tried to focus on productivity and some light entertainment and didn't even throw the other two a bone by supporting a PC link feature. Particularly they didn't make a physical link possible - Wifi is not reliable/high bandwidth enough for most people, so those third party solutions aren't cutting it.
Apple users are mostly locked out of the existing PC VR ecosystem - Apple didn't have to rely on developers writing dedicated apps.
spacedcowboy
I bought the AVP for one thing only - long haul flights. It makes the experience completely and utterly different, and it's less than the cost of a business seat.
It "works for me".
RajT88
I know a lady who owns an ISV. Per her, you make a lot more money on the app store compared to other platforms.
philistine
The Playdate, made by Panic, has a more active store than Vision Pro.
Workaccount2
I wouldn't blame them, Americans on the whole fall over themselves to defend Apple. Apple is the magic entity that figured out how to send full videos and pictures in text messages. Something a google android could never figure out. Apple phones didn't come bloated with garbage. You go to the apple store for help rather than the verizon store. You are above others when you have an iPhone.
Apple's external veneer is stellar, and the overwhelming majority of people don't know and don't care what it is holding up that veneer.
nostromo
I want Apple to protect me from app developers. For me, it’s a feature not a bug.
I want them to prevent social media companies from tracking my device across my other apps.
I want them to integrate billing so I can easily cancel subscriptions or get refunds.
I want them to require Oauth that allows me to keep my email private from app developers.
These features make my customer experience better not worse. I’m sorry it sucks for app developers to make less money but for customers it’s mostly a good thing.
TheDong
We're on Hacker News, not Granny News.
Being a hacker means having curiosity about the things around you, having the desire to be able to change and understand things.
On android, I wrote small toy apps for myself, I could build and self-sign an APK, I could poke at how the system worked and read all the source code I wanted.
Tragically, due to blue bubbles and group chats within my family, I was forced to switch to iOS, and I thought sure, it wouldn't be so bad...
No, it sucks for hackers, you can't build and sign apps from linux reliably, you need an apple account and to pay $100 even if you do have a macbook, the APIs are limited, you can't see the source code for the most of the kernel or platform, apple has a ton of APIs you're not allowed to use.
My firefox addons I developed for myself installed fine on android, but I can't even use those on iOS.
I want apple to let me use the device I paid for.
_aavaa_
> I want them to prevent social media companies from tracking my device across my other apps.
Apple is the one who implements the advertising ID companies use to track you. And preventing that tracking is a is-level feature, not a thing they review out of app.
> I want them to require Oauth that allows me to keep my email private from app developers.
You are describing a private email address.
m463
I would like to know what is running on my phone, what it is doing and who it is communicating with.
I would like to be able to prevent it, like running a firewall or disabling bluetooth for certain processes or more...
Workaccount2
Those features have fat apple tax overhead and are not unique to iPhones.
That's why I talk about the veneer that users don't care to look beyond. Customers get bent by Apple and aren't even aware of it.
mperham
None of that requires a 30% cut.
tomp
All those are awesome features, and I use them all the time.
But that's no reason to prevent them from being opt-out. It should be possible to not use OAuth, integrated billing, social media tracking etc.
CamperBob2
I want Apple to protect me from app developers. For me, it’s a feature not a bug.
Security is not mutually exclusive with informed consent. Apple's greatest trick was convincing you -- and, evidently, themselves -- that it is.
gostsamo
If you don't like social media, don't use it. Isn't that what all apple fans tell when someone dislikes apple practices?
burnte
> Americans on the whole fall over themselves to defend Apple
No, we don't. Apple fans from all nations do, but there is literally zero national pride in Apple.
rythmshifter
"americans on the whole"
blanket statements like this are never accurate
jtmarl1n
Your comment also makes a blanket statement.
behnamoh
> Americans on the whole fall over themselves to defend Apple.
What does it have to do with nationality? I've seen Apple fanboys from all countries. Sure, Apple's market share in the US relative to other phone manufacturers is high, but that's mostly due to the "trust" Americans have in US-based companies (you can argue this trust is misplaced).
Tryk
Well they've been getting away with it for years seemingly without any real consequences. Why should we assume corporations behave morally when there are no sanctions?
hedora
It's been under a month since Apple's lawyer took over the NLRB and immediately made a bunch of lawsuits over union suppression, employee rights and widespread employee harassment go away.
https://appleinsider.com/articles/25/04/02/trump-admin-poach...
I'm hoping this judge's ruling will actually be enforced by the executive branch, but I'm not holding my breath. I wonder if there are any mechanisms that allow state law enforcement to enforce federal judicial orders.
weaksauce
if it’s anything like wells fargo 8 million fine for opening up bank accounts in peoples names without their knowledge... after a 1 million donation to trump’s inauguration the fine will go down to 150,000 dollars.
pyronik19
Unfortunately their arrogance isn't false bravado. iPhones brand is extremely strong. Funny aside I know many women who won't date men who's text come up in green bubbles... thats branding.
Swoerd
>Look at how snubbing developers has worked out for the Apple Vision Pro. It was already a niche device, but it's a ghost town.
This isn’t really about that. The reality is that the AVP costs $3500,- and realistically, how many users are there? It’s much more likely that developers will begin building for VisionOS once Apple releases a more affordable device.
mjamesaustin
This is the reality of development when you don't have support from developers - they will follow the money.
Contrast this with early iPhone app development where people were turning out in droves EXCITED to build something.
Apple has lost the trust and enthusiasm of the developer community by making their lives harder and harder over time. Of course they aren't going to lift a finger now unless it will make them money. The same wouldn't be true if Apple provided them the support to get excited about a new platform.
kace91
>Internally, Phillip Schiller had advocated that Apple comply with the Injunction, but Tim Cook ignored Schiller and instead allowed Chief Financial Officer Luca Maestri and his finance team to convince him otherwise. Cook chose poorly. The real evidence, detailed herein, more than meets the clear and convincing standard to find a violation.
Judging by tech, apple is right now in deep water due to the failure of delivering apple intelligence and a major drop in software quality.
Judging by political positioning, cook’s donation to trump’s inauguration didn’t sit well with the fanbase.
Now, it seems Cook is going for shady behavior against judges.
Maybe it’s time for a major change of leadership. Financially they might be ok, but one can’t avoid the feeling they’re burning the furniture to heat the house.
philistine
Tim Cook has overstayed his welcome. He should have left years ago at this point. That plus the fact that all his successors are built on the same nondescript mold he came out of, does not bode well for the strategic vision of Apple.
behnamoh
> Tim Cook has overstayed his welcome.
This isn't the first time an influential leader (like Jobs) chooses the next leader only for everyone to realize the next person isn't a "leader" type, but rather someone who was put in charge to maintain the status quo, not tarnish the previous leader's legacy, and not come up with crazy new ideas.
layer8
It doesn't look to have achieved those goals this time around.
adrr
Multiple failed large projects under his watch, Apple Intelligence, Apple Vision, Apple Car. For comparison, Huawei and Xiaomi both have launched cars. Samsung AI offering is much better than Apple's.
sitkack
I know Tim does a better job, but he is the mirror image of his counterpart at Google. Made from the same mold. Great peace time substitutes, lousy leaders.
crims0n
> Judging by political positioning, cook’s donation to trump’s inauguration didn’t sit well with the fanbase.
On the other hand, it may have saved his company billions on tariffs.
null
udev4096
Cook is getting cooked
test6554
Apple might still appeal to a higher court and lean heavily on that donation to Trump for legal support. They as much as said they would appeal the decision.
Molitor5901
I think Apple has needed a change of leadership since day one of the Cook era. He may have been brilliant at logistics and putting products on shelves, but I think Apple innovation has flatlined under Cooke and if anything, the holier than thou arrogance of Apple in general has grown exponentially. Maybe it's time to breakup Apple - separate the computer and phone divisions.
Tadpole9181
A change of leadership? This is clear, obvious, undenied evidence of Tim Cook committing a criminal act. This is a crime. A coordinated, intentional, well-informed crime made in malice!
He should go to jail!
jobs_throwaway
100%. For any regular citizen this would obviously lead to jail time. Being Tim Cook shouldn't change that.
ujkhsjkdhf234
I hope he gets criminal charges. The amount of people who lie under oath and get away with it is unacceptable. Lets get all the politicians who lied under oath next as well.
intrasight
It's not gonna happen. And for the reason that you just gave.
ujkhsjkdhf234
The only reason I have the smallest bit of hope is that this is a state case in California and not a federal one.
teraflop
No, it's a federal court case. The original claim that Epic won against Apple was based on California state law, but it was decided in a federal US District Court (N.D. Cal) because there were also claims under federal law (the Sherman Antitrust Act) and because Epic and Apple are headquartered in different states.
TechDebtDevin
California is not going to punish Apple Execs lmao.
mykowebhn
And other execs, like Zuckerberg
caseyy
A whistleblower recently shared information corroborating that Zuckerberg lied in his testimony to the US Congress. Whether that testimony was under oath and what penalties lying in a congressional testimony bring... I'm not sure. It would be interesting to know.
mikhailfranco
Start with Fauci. Yes, an autopenned unprecedented preemptive blanket pardon, but charge him anyway, make him invoke the pardon. Discovery would be fascinating. Certainly there would be more details about unpardoned co-conspirators in the lying and cover-up.
aeurielesn
It's baffling putting together a C-suite of anti-competitive executives doesn't get anyone criminal charges.
hobs
Its only baffling if you think consumers control the courts, which they self evidently do not.
Molitor5901
Al Gore is still on the board.
rdtsc
Link to the court doc:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.36...
> The testimony of Mr. Roman, Vice President of Finance, was replete with misdirection and outright lies. He even went so far as to testify that Apple did not look at comparables to estimate the costs of alternative payment solutions that developers would need to procure to facilitate linked-out purchases. (May 2024 Tr. 266:22–267:11 (Roman).)
> Mr. Roman did not stop there, however. He also testified that up until January 16, 2024, Apple had no idea what fee it would impose on linked-out purchases:
> Q. And I take it that Apple decided to impose a 27 percent fee on linked purchases prior to January 16, 2024, correct? A. The decision was made that day.
> Q. It’s your testimony that up until January 16, 2024, Apple had no idea what -- what fee it’s going to impose on linked purchases? A. That is correct
> (May 2024 Tr. 202:12–18 (Roman).) Another lie under oath: contemporaneous business
So was Roman incompetent or just kissing ass hoping to become the President of Finance
vessenes
In the words of a trial lawyer friend of mine, “Nobody in the history of the world has said, ‘You know what? The judge was right; I was an asshole.’
Definitely some of those vibes there. I’ve generally been on team apple for this case, and as Gruber notes, they largely won the case. Dunking on their power to set other contractual fees seems to have come back to bite them. That said, as a user, I strongly prefer to use Apple’s in-app payments — I was just buying a hearthstone purchase from Blizzard; on my laptop it popped up options like “Credit Card or PayPal?” I was like “nah” and loaded it up on my iPad to pay with Apple Pay.
Do I hate PayPal? No. Do I appreciate a payment service that shows all my recurring payments in one place, lets me cancel them, and feels generally very safe? Yes. I’m happy to have Apple compete on fair playing field for payments.
Summary: Oops.
rideontime
I'm unable to find where Gruber says that Apple "largely won" (not that I would be surprised to see Gruber making such a claim). His latest headline literally begins with "Apple lost." Where are you seeing that?
wtallis
From https://daringfireball.net/2025/04/gonzales_rogers_apple_app...
> Keep in mind this whole thing stems from an injunction from a lawsuit filed by Epic Games that Apple largely won. The result of that lawsuit was basically, “OK, Apple wins, Epic loses, but this whole thing where apps in the App Store aren’t allowed to inform users of offers available outside the App Store, or send them to such offers on the web (outside the app) via easily tappable links, is bullshit and needs to stop. If the App Store is not anticompetitive it should be able to compete with links to the web and offers from outside the App Store.”
And there's a subsequent post elaborating on this point: https://daringfireball.net/linked/2025/05/01/apple-lost-but-...
rideontime
I don't buy into the analogy. Cable providers can't prevent you from watching free OTA channels on your television, but Apple prevents Epic from publishing iOS apps outside of the App Store. Considering Fortnite was removed from the App Store specifically due to offering outside payment options, denying its return will likely lead straight back to court.
spacedcowboy
It's in the text of his blog entry. Right there. In black and white. Word for word.
Keep in mind this whole thing stems from an injunction from a lawsuit filed by Epic Games that Apple largely won. - emphasis his.
And he's right, Epic "largely lost" that case, Apple only needed to concede the minimal things they didn't win and it would have been an epic win (as opposed to an Epic win) for them. Sweeney didn't get much of what he wanted, Apple mostly got everything they wanted.
yalogin
Wow that is pretty damning. I understand that they want to protect their revenue, but looks like they screwed up here.
perihelions
Also
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43852145 ("Apple violated antitrust ruling, judge finds (wsj.com)" — 336 comments)
dataflow
Is there any reason to believe anyone will even get charged, let alone face trial, let alone convicted? And if so is there any reason to believe they won't be pardoned upon a conviction?
thrill
"is there any reason to believe they won't be pardoned"
Shortly after the next unexplained bull market in $TRUMP a pardon will appear along with direct links to their upcoming subscription service conveniently preloaded and un-delete-able from the iPhone Home Screen.
null
DaiPlusPlus
> And if so is there any reason to believe they won't be pardoned upon a conviction?
Given Apple's direct pushback against Trump's anti-"DEI" campaign, it's less likely than I might have thought - or maybe that's leverage? e.g. what if Trump promises to pardon Apple's executives if they remove the giant rainbow thingie from Apple Park and stop selling pride-related Apple watch straps?
coldpie
You are being distracted by the culture war sideshow. No war but the class war, and Apple's execs are definitely powerful enough players in that war to protect themselves from consequences.
afavour
It's not really a culture war sideshow it's a "buying favor with the administration" sideshow. And it does matter, Trump is not exactly a man with a strong loyalty streak. Demonstrating fealty to him on a regular basis could absolutely result in preferable outcomes for Apple.
hedora
An Apple attorney is now head of the NLRB. The day they were appointed, they stopped three ongoing lawsuits against Apple (including the #appleToo anti-harassment class action suit):
https://appleinsider.com/articles/25/04/02/trump-admin-poach...
Tim Cook is better at PR than Musk, but he's also a member of Trump's inner circle (why else would there be tariff carveouts that directly benefit Apple?):
https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/apple-ceo-tim-...
Unlike Musk, the two were also close during Trump 1.0.
The rainbow thingy isn't a gay pride thing. The rainbow colors are out of order, just like in the original Apple logo.
Eddy_Viscosity2
Will the executive actually face an criminal charges? No they will not.
jordanb
The upside is that executives are cowards (also there's no way in hell I'm going to prison for my employer and most people I know feel the same) so even one high profile successful prosecution will have enormous deterrance effect.
There is this despondent feeling among most people that the law no longer applies to the powerful and we watch the behave with ever more brazenness. The saving grace is the amount of pushback needed to put them back in line is very small. Once they see any consequences for their actions they will fall in line.
notyourwork
Generally I agree but I think the pushback needs to be a bit larger than you suggest.
Over the last 25 years, we’ve become more tolerant to larger leeway for those of certain societal status. A relatively large whiplash must happen to course correct the general behavior, in my opinion.
heroprotagonist
> we’ve become more tolerant
We've become more powerless, you mean. The government has become more tolerant.
blooalien
> "A relatively large whiplash must happen to course correct the general behavior, in my opinion."
Indeed. Someone (or a couple few well-known someones) in positions of real "power" need to do some real prison time in a real prison for their massive lawbreaking and abuses of power before they'll take the situation somewhat seriously.
AlexandrB
I think cowards is the wrong word - more like opportunists. Like you said, almost no one wants to go to jail for "shareholder value" or a 10% bonus.
bluSCALE4
The coward part was to stress his later point that they'll all fall in line like a herd of animals.
voakbasda
> Once they see any consequences for their actions they will fall in line.
I would wager that idea crossed the mind of Luigi Mangione.
It will take more than a slap on the hand from the court to change anything.
dylan604
> most people that the law no longer applies to the powerful
gee, I wonder why! you now have POTUS openly defying the direct orders from the highest court. That's so much further past some corp executive committing a crime that hasn't even gone to trial yet.
mschuster91
> Once they see any consequences for their actions they will fall in line.
We're seeing this with just how fast and ruthless many executives were after Trump won the election, actually. The behavior of some of these people is best described as "swearing fealty": donations to Trump's circle, dismantling of anything remotely smelling as "DEI" instead of standing up for what was sold as "core values" over the last years, compliance instead of resistance (just recently Bezos in the Amazon tariff pricing issue, or the "resignation" of 60 Minutes producer Bill Owens so that the Trump admin doesn't impede a corporate merger).
We've been asking ourselves "wtf are the Russian oligarchs doing" after Putin invaded Ukraine, and now we're seeing just the same compliance from our own oligarchs.
Molitor5901
and the 9th Circuit is almost certain to overturn this. Apple is a major employer, donor, etc. that I can't see this going all the way. I hope, but I am so jaded on the courts doing anything to actually hold companies and their executives responsible that I can't help but be pessimistic.
JumpCrisscross
John Gruber has a good summary of the ruling: https://daringfireball.net/2025/04/gonzales_rogers_apple_app....
My favourite part: "Unlike Mr. Maestri and Mr. Roman, Mr. Schiller sat through the entire underlying trial and actually read the entire 180-page decision. That Messrs. Maestri and Roman did neither, does not shield Apple of its knowledge (actual and constructive) of the Court’s findings."
cyral
Great summary. I will add to this:
> Apple’s response: charge a 27 percent commission (again tied to nothing) on off-app purchases, where it had previously charged nothing, and extend the commission for a period of seven days after the consumer linked-out of the app.
Not only have they been asking for this, but the link to your external checkout could only be in once place in your app, and could not be part of the payment flow (where else would you put it??)
They also want rights to audit your financials to determine compliance
And this scary popup before going to the external payment page: https://d7ych6cwyfyiba.archive.is/AZrEz/0c8d40ed4a6886240370...
Not sure if such a large font is used anywhere else in iOS
The whole thing was so obviously designed to prevent any developer from seriously considering it, maintaining their anti-competitive advantage. Glad the judge finally had enough.
onionisafruit
Thanks for posting that. I came away from tfa wondering what the actual lie was. Gruber made that clear and was a good read otherwise.
AtlasBarfed
My biggest takeaway out of this is Jim Jordan in the Senate trying to sneak through antitrust weakening.
From the "free market" party from a senator with at least some shame on the red aisle.
It really is open season for buying politicians.
cynicalpeace
Correct, but as the article states, it was the MAGA side that laid into him and made him pull it.
Steve Bannon has said many times he would've kept Lina Khan.
The populists are socially conservative but economically liberal in many respects (not all, obviously)
cosmicgadget
> This is an injunction, not a negotiation. There are no do-overs once a party willfully disregards a court order.
...
> referred the matter to the U.S. Attorney for a criminal contempt investigation.
It's suddenly become a negotiation again.
hedora
You need two sides for a negotiation.
Based on the tariff carve-outs and the political appointments Trump's made, Apple leadership is definitely inside Trump's inner circle.
They've been smart enough not to parade Tim Cook around in a MAGA hat, but just barely:
https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/apple-ceo-tim-...
I expect there to be some performative lawyering by the Trump administration until the case blows over.
cosmicgadget
Haha okay fair point, the negotiation already took place.
Though the contempt referral may have not been part of the deal and might cost extra.
The top brass at Apple just think they are above everyone else. Remember when Tim Cook lied about Apple not giving anyone special terms in the app store and that everyone gets the same deal. And then it came out Netflix was one that got special terms?
The sheer arrogance of Apple leaders is astounding. They think they are outright owed rent on anything that runs on an iPhone, iPad, etc. Apple thinks developers are nothing without Apple. Look at how snubbing developers has worked out for the Apple Vision Pro. It was already a niche device, but it's a ghost town.