this really comes down to a "cultural" difference between the private tech sector and government. all companies collude. they do so in order to position themselves best because all of them want to create a monopoly for themselves. it's just how it works when your only driving force is profit and growth. you have nowhere else to go in a capitalist economy. now the doj has no clue about profit growth so everything to them looks like collusion and potential monopoly.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
DOJ Says Publishers Are Again Colluding in Objecting to Proposed Apple Penalty in E-Book Case
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
At Wal-Mart, it's referred to as "Rolling Back Prices."
I pretty much view both of those corporation's strategies as one and the same kill the little man.
I think I understand....
1. Amazon has a near monopoly (monopsony?)
2. Amazon can do whatever they want (it was Amazon who requested the DoJ pursue this matter in the first place)
3. Many companies are affected (if not outright killed off) by Amazon's predatory practices
4. If those companies make a peep, they are "colluding" against poor Amazon!
5. How could all the publishers respond at the same time? It's almost as though they're all responding to the same thing that just happened. Nah... collusion.
1. Amazon has a near monopoly (monopsony?)
2. Amazon can do whatever they want (it was Amazon who requested the DoJ pursue this matter in the first place)
3. Many companies are affected (if not outright killed off) by Amazon's predatory practices
4. If those companies make a peep, they are "colluding" against poor Amazon!
5. How could all the publishers respond at the same time? It's almost as though they're all responding to the same thing that just happened. Nah... collusion.
This is what one gets not being corrupt.
DC is a shakedown operation, so if you're not plugged in you get mugged.
This is why Bozo buying the Washington Post is such a good deal. Everyone in DC-NY corridor wonders how the digitized Wal-Mart clown will make money on a dying antique newspaper, but they don't get it - he bought influence, he bought his way into the social circle of the DOJ, Congresscritters, etc. No matter the clowns in power, Bozo has access to them with not the business of the Post but the social institution - the lunches and cocktail parties and all the rest. That's where power is in DC.
Apple is a good example of what happens when you don't grease the DC skids. They make all this money, are an American icon more effective than any propaganda, employ thousands, and make popular stuff. But they don't play the game...so you see Tim Cook be whipping boy in Congress, this DOJ shakedown, etc. Meanwhile Amazon runs vast sweatshop warehouses with a predatory money-losing business model - and gets away with it.
But they play the game better than Apple does, indeed with the WaPo purchase obviously play it better than any other digital business.
DC is a shakedown operation, so if you're not plugged in you get mugged.
This is why Bozo buying the Washington Post is such a good deal. Everyone in DC-NY corridor wonders how the digitized Wal-Mart clown will make money on a dying antique newspaper, but they don't get it - he bought influence, he bought his way into the social circle of the DOJ, Congresscritters, etc. No matter the clowns in power, Bozo has access to them with not the business of the Post but the social institution - the lunches and cocktail parties and all the rest. That's where power is in DC.
Apple is a good example of what happens when you don't grease the DC skids. They make all this money, are an American icon more effective than any propaganda, employ thousands, and make popular stuff. But they don't play the game...so you see Tim Cook be whipping boy in Congress, this DOJ shakedown, etc. Meanwhile Amazon runs vast sweatshop warehouses with a predatory money-losing business model - and gets away with it.
But they play the game better than Apple does, indeed with the WaPo purchase obviously play it better than any other digital business.
Actually, they did neither (pled guilty or paid fines).
More info from the DoJ and other sources:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57568377-93/macmillan-reaches-e-book-pricing-settlement-with-doj/
http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2012/April/12-at-457.html
http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2013/February/13-at-171.html
Note in the CNET article the very important statement from Macmillan's John Sargent:
So if they went to court and lost, in his view, the company could be forced out of business. The risk was too high and they settled, even though they did not feel they were guilty!
The DoJ's proposal for dealing with Apple now oversteps the agreements with the publishers who settled, they complain about it (as they are being punished beyond their prior settlements) and then the DoJ uses their complaints as more proof that they are conspiring??? LOL, seriously? It should have been expected.
The corporation should reward the population because we open our markets to them. If you don't have loyalty to the market, then I think the market has the right to tell the corporation they're parasites in such a circumstance.
The same way a corporation should have the right to tell the market that the market is a parasite, if that is so the case.
It works both ways, or should anyway, you know? If the corporation says go scratch, why can't the people?
If Apple takes US money and off-shores it, then the US should, in my view, tell Apple, hey, you're not serving our interests. If the money is legitimately gained overseas, then I don't think it should be touched by the US, unless Apple wills it.
I would say that a company that keeps $100,000,000,000 overseas isn't American and should simply not be treated like it is, unless that's a minority of its cash horde. Why, Samsung is more of an American company than Apple nowadays in terms of production and manufacturing. Yet Apple seems to get the preferential treatment from our government on patent cases...
Sargent said:
This is extortion. Literally.
http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-charges/extortion.html
findlaw said:
State DA's? Grand juries?
This case would get a bunch of them re-elected.
Luckily most of the sci-fi authors I read sell their books without publishers. This crap sounds vaguely familiar to the music industry clamor.
My mistake, the publishers all settled out of court and agreed to change their business models in order to avoid going to court, being found guilty and given punitive fines. Not sure what the difference is. They're still guilty of price fixing whether they like to admit it or not.
Apple didn't settle so they will go to court, lose and end up with a big fine.
----------
For anyone confused by this case I thought this was an interesting article:
http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2013/07/11/a-disastrous-week-for-publishers-authors-and-readers/
The problem here is that Apple did illegally collude with the publishers to usurp Amazon's lead in eBooks.
Now that the DoJ has won the case the taint of collusion is on the Defendants which means the attorney is smart to point out similar behavior whether it's right or not.
I knew Apple was going to lose this case. They delivered the proverbial "smoking gun" with some of those emails from Jobs.
The "Loss Leader" approach to selling has been time tested and is not predatory. Apple and the publishers colluded to raise pricing and force Amazon to employ the same agency model. That is antithetical to what consumers want and voids ethical behavior.
This is one of those situations where good/bad lines are blurred but for the sake of consumer protection the right decision was made by the DoJ.
Now that the DoJ has won the case the taint of collusion is on the Defendants which means the attorney is smart to point out similar behavior whether it's right or not.
I knew Apple was going to lose this case. They delivered the proverbial "smoking gun" with some of those emails from Jobs.
The "Loss Leader" approach to selling has been time tested and is not predatory. Apple and the publishers colluded to raise pricing and force Amazon to employ the same agency model. That is antithetical to what consumers want and voids ethical behavior.
This is one of those situations where good/bad lines are blurred but for the sake of consumer protection the right decision was made by the DoJ.
The publishers were punished as well just not directly from court order due to guilt.
Many settled multimillion dollar fines and some even plea bargained to stand witness against apple to avoid punishment
But the DoJ does have a valid point. These 5 publishers were all basically found to be colluding. Their next action was to team up and collude to tell the DoJ to allow them to return to collusion.
thats not smart. right or wrong, it's just not smart
I have seen no such information of these settlements, do you have info? Nothing I've found indicated anything of the sort, including the info on the DoJ's site itself.
So here's what's happening:
I tell everyone that you are argumentative.
You say "I'm not".
I say "See, that proves it. You are arguing already".
I tell everyone that you are argumentative.
You say "I'm not".
I say "See, that proves it. You are arguing already".
You can't use Safari to buy the books because of a fear of what exactly?
And I hate to point this out, but Apple is much more likely to the Kindle app off of IOS then let them add buy in app. That is banned from basically every app, not just book reading ones, and they aren't likely to change a major rule of the app store, for two apps (Kindle & Nook), nor should they.
-Tig
Yeah, no wonder Apple is moving more and more of it's business to a free country like China!
What complete nonsense! Do you really think the Obama administration would veto the USITC over their proposed Apple ban out of pure kindness? Of course Apple have influence on Capitol Hill.
But I suppose this is MacRumors - where Apple are gods and everyone else is evil!