If the court certified a class of people alleging a claim against Apple based on damages incurred as a result of the AirTag products, the case, at the very least, deserves to be heard on its merits.

I don’t think it’s unreasonable that something like this would go to trial. The questions of what statutes, if any, has Apple violated and what liability Apple should hold deserve to be answered in a court of equity.

Now whether the final ruling will be fair and just depends on your view of our system of civil courts and the doctrine of stare decisis.

Think of it this way; if the court agrees with you, then there is precedent set that implies corporations may not have liability under a set of circumstances similar to the ones described in this article. There are broader implications of the question that go beyond Apple.

My bad, should have just purchased a lake house.

I have to imagine it’s a very difficult thing to cope with; learning something like that about a very close friend. It has to really mess with you. And I can understand the human instinct to want to defend them regardless of your moral standards.

I personally don’t think this goes to show any moral failing on their part. Or at worst, whatever moral failing may be present is mostly due in part to a natural human reaction to complex emotions better dealt with in therapy. As such, I think these two should be afforded a bit of leeway.