Apple Could Owe $500 Million After Being Found Guilty in E-Book Antitrust Case

Discussion in 'MacRumors.com News Discussion' started by MacRumors, Jul 25, 2013.

  1. macrumors bot

    MacRumors

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2001
    #1
    [​IMG]


    [​IMG]
    After being found guilty in federal court of conspiring to artificially inflate e-book prices, legal experts are estimating that Apple could owe as much as $500 million in damages.

    GigaOm has shared a chart provided to the federal judge in the case by the Texas attorney general. It shows how much in damages the five publishers have been found liable and how much they have paid in settlements. The remainder -- after damages have been trebled for willful violations -- works out to roughly $500 million.
    [​IMG]
    Apple has indicated that it will appeal the guilty ruling and it's likely that it will be many months or even years before the case is resolved.

    Article Link: Apple Could Owe $500 Million After Being Found Guilty in E-Book Antitrust Case
     
  2. macrumors 6502a

    pirg

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2013
    #2
    No sweat, they'll use the 600 million Samsung owes them for stealing :p
     
  3. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 24, 2013
    #3
    500 mil, I'm sure Apple's shaking in their gold boots :rolleyes:
     
  4. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 27, 2003
    Location:
    Silicon Valley
    #4
    What I don't get is why in the original case part of their defense didn't include pointing out the Amazon was illegally selling ebooks below cost as an anti-competitive move, and that their model put a stop to that, which is why prices went up.
     
  5. macrumors 6502a

    CrazyForApple

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2012
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    #5
    Tim Cook craps that much out everyday after dinner
     
  6. macrumors 6502

    ka-spot

    Joined:
    May 23, 2012
  7. macrumors 6502a

    A Hebrew

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2012
    Location:
    Minnesota
  8. macrumors 6502

    scbn

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2010
    #8
    This sounds like 'rob the rich' since they have the money...
     
  9. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2011
    #9
    Nah. Apple was really trying to scam us all into paying higher prices. It wasn't an accident that ebook prices went from a generally standard $10 to whatever the hell the publishers wanted when the iPad came around.
     
  10. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2008
    #10
    Actually, it is not illegal to sell books below cost. It may or may not be a smart business move, but it's not illegal.

    What is illegal however is selling something (in this case books) at a set price and telling the manufacturer (in this case the publishers) that they can't let anyone else sell it for a lower price. This is what Apple was doing and why they should definitely be considered guilty.

    Many gas stations tried something similar about 10 years ago and were fined for it. Retailers have tried this before and didn't get away with it. Why should Apple be let off the hook?
     
  11. macrumors 68040

    Mad Mac Maniac

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2007
    Location:
    A little bit of here and a little bit of there.
    #11
    $500M is nothing to sneeze at... even for Apple. Plus, who does this money go to? The US Government? These kinds of laws/rulings are so self-serving its ridiculous....
     
  12. macrumors 601

    gotluck

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2011
    Location:
    East Central Florida
    #12
    Lol at these responses.. Samsung will probably scoff at whatever amount they end up having to pay Apple too . We'll see how everyone feels then..
     
  13. macrumors 6502

    jm001

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2011
    #13
    $500 mil? That comes out of their petty cash probably. I can see Tim now as he searches through the couches at HQ for change.
     
  14. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2012
  15. macrumors 68020

    Diode

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2004
    Location:
    Washington DC
    #15
    Apple wasn't setting the price though. The publishers were. The publishers could have just as easily lowered their price to match Amazon's but chose to force Amazon into an agency model so they could match the price to what they were selling through the App store.
     
  16. macrumors 6502a

    pirg

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2013
    #16
    Who cares? Neither company is going to be hurt by it. This stuff is not about the money
     
  17. macrumors 68020

    Dontazemebro

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2010
    Location:
    I dunno, somewhere in West Texas
    #17
    What, Apple over-inflating prices?

    Can't be true.
     
  18. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    #18
    Hey can you provide a citation for that in Apple's contracts (maybe I missed it?)
     
  19. macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2006
    Location:
    Aussie living in Canada
  20. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2012
    #20
    No such law exists. It's called the free market (for the most part, it is free).

    ----------

    To consumes who overpaid for the books.
     
  21. macrumors 601

    gotluck

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2011
    Location:
    East Central Florida
    #21
    Does not compute

    Everything is about money, especially with these corps.
     
  22. macrumors 6502

    FirstNTenderbit

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2013
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #22
    It's pretty simple. You can't base your defense on a fallacy. Selling something below cost isn't illegal. It's called a loss leader. Retailers do it to get you in their doors (virtual or physical) with the hopes that you will buy more profitable things.
     
  23. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2011
    #23
    Going to the Supreme Court

    This case protected Amazon's monopoly, the exact opposite of what anti-trust law is supposed to accomplish. It's clear Amazon has been raising prices lately (beginning with eliminating discounts - see the New York Times piece from early July). So until this one is heard by the Supreme Court at some distant point in the future, enjoy being at Amazon's mercy!
     
  24. macrumors 6502a

    chrisbru

    Joined:
    May 8, 2008
    Location:
    Des Moines, IA
    #24
    Mostly true. It CAN be illegal, but only if a company is doing it specifically to drive a smaller competitor out of business. However, that is because the predatory pricing is evidence of antitrust violations, and typically is a VERY high hurdle to clear because predatory pricing at least temporarily benefits consumers, and new market entrants make it impossible for a business to price predatorily, drive competition out completely, and then jack prices back up to higher-than-before levels.
     
  25. Lazy, Jul 25, 2013
    Last edited: Jul 25, 2013

    macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 27, 2003
    Location:
    Silicon Valley
    #25
    What he said. :)
     

Share This Page