IANAL but I think the idea is this: The plaintiff claim that Apple knew about the defect, and so it was willful deception to omit the defect in any written materials which could influence a purchase decision.

Apple's reply is that customers weren't given any written materials prior to purchase, not even the box. So there was no way omissions in the written materials could have influenced purchase decisions.

-Your explanation makes sense; the principle does not.

Thanks!

I agree!

"We've omitted everything so we've omitted nothing" - Apple

Alternatively, "We can't have misinformed if we haven't informed at all" Still a jerk move