joining me now with more in the studio, tim higgins. they did not deliberate for a long. just a few hours or so. >> they have gotten around to the idea of -- did apple make these changes to kill their competitor or improve their? -- their product? they argued that the record products they go before itunes require them to make changes because of concerns over hackers. >> the plaintiffs said that the changes at apple made it more like an addictive candy bar and customers just had to keep coming back, but here it seems that the jury ridley decided that apple did not do anything -- quickly decided that the jury -- quickly decided that apple did not do anything wrong. >> they even lost some of their plaintiffs at some point for various reasons. it was a complicated case that they were trying to make. this idea that changes were made to hurt a competitor that a lot of people were not even very familiar with. but it is interesting that this is a case that dates back like 10 years. what are the cases for apple today? >> one of the cases will be -- how much were they found guilty?