Apple: When Apple released its Safari 3.1 for Windows Web browser, it wasn’t content to simply promote its new product. Instead, it released the browser as an "update" to its popular iTunes music software, causing many iTunes users to involuntarily install Safari. Critics claimed that Apple’s behavior "bordered on malware distribution practices," driving Apple to clearly identify Safari as a new product and have users opt in prior to installation.

Apple: Apple's attempt to clamp down on blog posts about rumored upcoming products was not only a bad legal strategy, according to the judge, but also bad business strategy, according to Forbes. The court held that bloggers have the same right to protect the confidentiality of their sources as do offline reporters; Apple was chastised by Forbes for "biting the fans that feed it." Its poor decision to disregard free speech cost the company substantial legal fees as well as its sparkling reputation in the blogosphere.