Judge rejects Apple/Google/Intel/etc settlement; says parties need to pay more

In a victory for engineers and techies everywhere, Judge Lucy Koh has rejected the settlement proposed in the High-Tech Employee Antitrust Litigation case. The settlement was originally drawn up by the plaintiffs' legal counsel, Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, a process which ordinarily would involve the participation and approval of the plaintiffs. Because the suit was class-action, however, the law firm allegedly moved forward on behalf of the plaintiffs without the approval of the class representatives, and informed them only after a settlement agreement had already been reached. One of the plaintiffs, Michael Devine, asked the judge to reject the settlement based on the inequality of the proposed value to the amount of damage done, and it appears that Judge Koh agreed. Apple, Google, Intel, et al, and the plaintiffs' attorneys, will be required to either submit a higher offer or take the case to trial, a possibility that might lead to billions in damages considering the amount of evidence the plaintiffs have compiled. Even if it does not go to trial, however, the judge's decision is a heads-up to businesses that this sort of behavior has consequences.