Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Aug 27, 2013, 03:48 PM   #1
MacRumors
macrumors bot
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
E-Books Judge Pledges to Avoid Unnecessary Intrusion Into Apple's Business




Judge Denise Cote today told Apple and the Department of Justice that she does not want to intrude unnecessarily on Apple's business when levying a punishment for the company's e-book collusion charge. The statement came after she reviewed the DOJ's revised remedy, which was submitted last Friday.

As with the original remedy, the revised proposal suggests that Apple submit to third-party anti-collusion monitoring and subjects the company to an injunction that prevents Apple from entering into media deals that might raise prices for the company's competitors.

The terms state that Apple must dissolve all existing deals with publishers and renegotiate them on a staggered basis to prevent further collusion. The DOJ also wants Apple to allow competitors such as Amazon to insert hyperlinks to their own e-book stores in their iOS apps, with the government insisting that Apple initiated its in-app subscription rules "to retaliate against Amazon for competitive conduct that Apple disapproved of."

For its part, Apple has called the DOJ's proposal a "draconian and punitive intrusion into Apple's business," insisting that Department of Justice is attempting to set up an unfair competitive advantage for Amazon and is

According to Cote, she will approve remedies in the case next week. Apple has said that it continues to disagree with her antitrust finding and plans to pursue its appeal.

Article Link: E-Books Judge Pledges to Avoid Unnecessary Intrusion Into Apple's Business
MacRumors is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2013, 03:51 PM   #2
pseudomichael
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
It's kind of obnoxious that Apple doesn't allow Amazon to include a link to their store in their app, but in general it does seem like the courts are going overboard on this.
pseudomichael is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2013, 03:53 PM   #3
BornAgainApple
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Massachusetts
Well that's mighty nice of her.
BornAgainApple is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2013, 03:58 PM   #4
Nunyabinez
macrumors 6502a
 
Nunyabinez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Provo, UT
I am a rabid Apple fan, but I am at a loss for how they can still not see that they really did break the law here.

Yes, Amazon was exploiting their virtual monopoly in ebooks, but Apple and the publishers should have convinced the DOJ to investigate Amazon, not colluded to fix prices.

I know many of you will never be able to accept that Apple violated the law here, but they did. And since they do not appear able to accept that fact, the courts will have to have some oversight to make sure that they don't continue on in that behavior or do it again.
__________________
27" iMac, 3.4 GHz i7; 15" MBP, 2.53 GHz Core 2 Duo; 13" MBA 1.7 GHz i5; iPad (3rd Gen), 16 GB; iPhone 5S; Hackintosh, 3.4 GHz i7 (2600k)
Nunyabinez is offline   6 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2013, 04:03 PM   #5
ravenvii
macrumors 604
 
ravenvii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Melenkurion Skyweir
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRumors View Post
For its part, Apple has called the DOJ's proposal a "draconian and punitive intrusion into Apple's business," insisting that Department of Justice is attempting to set up an unfair competitive advantage for Amazon and is
... and is what?
__________________
59 6F 75 20 73 70 6F 6F 6E 79 20 62 61 72 64 21
ravenvii is offline   7 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2013, 04:06 PM   #6
ouimetnick
macrumors 68020
 
ouimetnick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Beverly, Massachusetts
Send a message via AIM to ouimetnick Send a message via Yahoo to ouimetnick Send a message via Skype™ to ouimetnick
If Apple has to allow Amazon to place a link to their store within the Kindle App, shouldn't Apple be allowed (if they wanted) to make an iBook Store application and have Amazon allow it on the Kindle so consumers have a choice between Amazon purchased books or Apple purchased books on their Amazon device?

If not, why should Apple be forced to allow Amazon to sell their books on Apple's platform?
__________________
ACMT
MacBook Pro 13" (Mid 2010) 2.4GHz C2D, 4GB RAM, 750GB HD; Mac Pro Mid 2007; various MacBooks; Power Mac G5; iPhone 4s; iPhone 5s
ouimetnick is offline   17 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2013, 04:07 PM   #7
dBeats
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
So remember folks...you can crash the price of goods and kill off mom and pop shops and independent artists....but you can't provide a superior service where the price of those goods goes back up.
dBeats is offline   14 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2013, 04:09 PM   #8
Klae17
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudomichael View Post
It's kind of obnoxious that Apple doesn't allow Amazon to include a link to their store in their app, but in general it does seem like the courts are going overboard on this.
That would make no sense. Would you also force Apple to sell samsung and Microsoft products in their physical stores?
Klae17 is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2013, 04:18 PM   #9
Renzatic
macrumors 604
 
Renzatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Who puts the washers in the woods?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ouimetnick View Post
If Apple has to allow Amazon to place a link to their store within the Kindle App, shouldn't Apple be allowed (if they wanted) to make an iBook Store application and have Amazon allow it on the Kindle so consumers have a choice between Amazon purchased books or Apple purchased books on their Amazon device?

If not, why should Apple be forced to allow Amazon to sell their books on Apple's platform?
Here's the thing that's so weird about what Apple's doing. Apple has ever right to deny what does or doesn't go on their app store. They don't have to allow the Kindle and Nook book apps on an iDevice. No one's forcing them to do anything here.

But despite this, they're readily available, albeit hobbled in comparison to iBooks. The assumption is if Apple is willing to treat the iPad as a general computing device, rather than a portal to their services, then they have no excuse to hamstring the competition's apps. Either treat everyone fairly, or don't treat them at all.
Renzatic is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2013, 04:20 PM   #10
JCox
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
So is it possible to drop the Amazon App all together?
JCox is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2013, 04:21 PM   #11
Parasprite
macrumors 65816
 
Parasprite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klae17 View Post
That would make no sense. Would you also force Apple to sell samsung and Microsoft products in their physical stores?
And here comes the analogies!
Parasprite is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2013, 04:24 PM   #12
charlituna
macrumors 604
 
charlituna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudomichael View Post
It's kind of obnoxious that Apple doesn't allow Amazon to include a link to their store in their app, but in general it does seem like the courts are going overboard on this.
They don't allow anyone to put in a link to a store/sign up that bypasses Apple. It's a fair rule as it is equally applied and enforced

Get DOJ is not so. They are setting rules against Apple only when it will create an unfair advantage at the risk of hurting consumers the same as they accused Apple.

And attempting to overstep with the inclusion of other forms of media and potentially with the forced dissolving of existing contracts. After all even the judge said there was nothing illegal in the terms. Agency and MFNs are both totally legal.

If the point of this is as they claim to protect consumers then they should set their own upper limits. To protect consume choice they should limit if not ban exclusive deals that prohibit titles from appearing in all stores. And so on. but they should apply to all parties.
__________________
Return of the Non Tech's Wish List
(She's family so I'm biased )
charlituna is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2013, 04:24 PM   #13
Oletros
macrumors 603
 
Oletros's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: PremiÓ de Mar
Quote:
Originally Posted by ouimetnick View Post
If not, why should Apple be forced to allow Amazon to sell their books on Apple's platform?
Because Apple has been found guilty of anti competition practices and Amazon not?
__________________
There are four kinds of lies: Lies, damned lies, statistics, and analyst projections.
Oletros is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2013, 04:24 PM   #14
CWallace
macrumors Demi-God
 
CWallace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Seattle, WA
Quote:
Originally Posted by pseudomichael View Post
It's kind of obnoxious that Apple doesn't allow Amazon to include a link to their store in their app, but in general it does seem like the courts are going overboard on this.
It is because if they did, it would allow customers to buy e-books from Amazon directly and bypass the 30% cut that Apple gets from the current process.

Now, I expect Apple is not so much worried about the 30% cut on Amazon e-book sales as you can load Amazon's e-book page in Mobile Safari and buy e-books directly from Amazon and Apple gets no cut of those sales so this process would be effectively the same. More likely, IMO, is that Apple is worried about precedent. To my knowledge, Apple does not allow any app to bypass the 30% cut process and if they do it for Amazon, they likely would open themselves up to lawsuits from other app makers citing unfair competition. And having already done so for Amazon, that would weaken Apple's defense in said cases.



Quote:
Originally Posted by JCox View Post
So is it possible to drop the Amazon App all together?
I expect there is no legal reason why Apple could not do so, but it is likely a selling point for portable iOS devices so doing so would probably bring more harm than good to sales of portable iOS devices.
CWallace is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2013, 04:25 PM   #15
Oletros
macrumors 603
 
Oletros's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: PremiÓ de Mar
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCox View Post
So is it possible to drop the Amazon App all together?
Mmm, no?
__________________
There are four kinds of lies: Lies, damned lies, statistics, and analyst projections.
Oletros is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2013, 04:26 PM   #16
charlituna
macrumors 604
 
charlituna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCox View Post
So is it possible to drop the Amazon App all together?
At this point no. The judge would claim they are doing it in retailation blah blah
__________________
Return of the Non Tech's Wish List
(She's family so I'm biased )
charlituna is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2013, 04:26 PM   #17
Rogifan
macrumors G3
 
Rogifan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
Here's the thing that's so weird about what Apple's doing. Apple has ever right to deny what does or doesn't go on their app store. They don't have to allow the Kindle and Nook book apps on an iDevice. No one's forcing them to do anything here.

But despite this, they're readily available, albeit hobbled in comparison to iBooks. The assumption is if Apple is willing to treat the iPad as a general computing device, rather than a portal to their services, then they have no excuse to hamstring the competition's apps. Either treat everyone fairly, or don't treat them at all.
I agree, but its not that difficult to go to bn.com or amazon.com, buy an ebook and open it on the Nook or Kindle app. That's what I do. I don't use iBooks.
__________________
"I have a very optimistic view of individuals. As individuals, people are inherently good. I have a somewhat more pessimistic view of people in groups." -- Steve Jobs , Wired interview
Rogifan is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2013, 04:32 PM   #18
Oletros
macrumors 603
 
Oletros's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: PremiÓ de Mar
Quote:
Originally Posted by CWallace View Post
I expect there is no legal reason why Apple could not do so, but it is likely a selling point for portable iOS devices so doing so would probably bring more harm than good to sales of portable iOS devices.
Looking at what happened when they didn't accept Google Voice I think they would have a lot of problems for doing that
__________________
There are four kinds of lies: Lies, damned lies, statistics, and analyst projections.
Oletros is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2013, 04:36 PM   #19
gnasher729
macrumors G5
 
gnasher729's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post
At this point no. The judge would claim they are doing it in retailation blah blah
And what exactly would be wrong with retaliation?
gnasher729 is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2013, 04:37 PM   #20
PinkyMacGodess
macrumors 68000
 
PinkyMacGodess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Midwest America.
Interesting that they come down hard on Apple, and let Wall Street dance away EVERY FRICKING TIME!!! Is it because DOJ likes Droids?
PinkyMacGodess is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2013, 04:38 PM   #21
Otis Bagotis
macrumors member
 
Join Date: May 2013
I'm still confused about what Apple did wrong.

So they negotiated with publishers that they can't offer their books for sale at a lower price to Apple's competitors. This caused the price of all e-books to go up instead of the price from Apple to go down? How is that Apple's fault? Do the publishers not set the price? I must be missing something.
Otis Bagotis is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2013, 04:40 PM   #22
Oletros
macrumors 603
 
Oletros's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: PremiÓ de Mar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Otis Bagotis View Post
I'm still confused about what Apple did wrong.

So they negotiated with publishers that they can't offer their books for sale at a lower price to Apple's competitors. This caused the price of all e-books to go up instead of the price from Apple to go down? How is that Apple's fault? Do the publishers not set the price? I must be missing something.
Yes, you're missing the part where the Agency Model was forced to all the other retailers
__________________
There are four kinds of lies: Lies, damned lies, statistics, and analyst projections.
Oletros is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2013, 04:41 PM   #23
Plutonius
macrumors 601
 
Plutonius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New Hampshire
When does the appeals trial start ?
Plutonius is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2013, 04:44 PM   #24
Renzatic
macrumors 604
 
Renzatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Who puts the washers in the woods?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post
I agree, but its not that difficult to go to bn.com or amazon.com, buy an ebook and open it on the Nook or Kindle app. That's what I do. I don't use iBooks.
Yeah, but it's a completely unnecessary hoop you have to jump through. Being able to buy books directly from the app would make things so much more convenient.

And since Apple's own apps give you the expectation of being able to do so...
Renzatic is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Aug 27, 2013, 04:53 PM   #25
yellowtruck
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Lame

And yet when it comes to GAS, Electric price gouging DOJ always gets real foggy, looks the other way or plays dumb then dummy-ups' an lulls the obvious with technical jargon nonsense justification???? Triple Standards regardless if Apple intended or not to raise prices! OK!
yellowtruck is offline   2 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > News and Article Discussion > MacRumors.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Apple Pledges $100 Million in Equipment to President Obama's ConnectED Initiative for Schools MacRumors Politics, Religion, Social Issues 76 May 1, 2014 12:57 PM
Spying / detecting intrusion. noodile Mac Basics and Help 6 Mar 8, 2014 03:35 AM
Apple Pledges Investigation After Chinese Woman Reportedly Electrocuted Using a Charging iPhone 5 MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 286 Jul 20, 2013 03:36 AM
U.S. Judge Expresses Frustration at Apple's and Google's Use of Litigation as 'Business Strategy' MacRumors MacRumors.com News Discussion 100 Apr 14, 2013 03:41 AM
UK Judge Is Forcing Apple To Publish On Its Website That Samsung Didn't Copy Apple Phokus iPad 1 Jul 18, 2012 04:05 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:18 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC