Apple's Closing Arguments Concludes E-Book Price Fixing Trial

Discussion in 'MacRumors.com News Discussion' started by MacRumors, Jun 20, 2013.

  1. macrumors bot

    MacRumors

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


    [​IMG]
    After slightly more than two weeks of litigation, USA v. Apple, Inc. concluded with closing arguments from Apple and the Department of Justice.

    AllThingsD reports that Orin Snyder, Apple's lead counsel, closed out the trial with a slick Keynote presentation, as the company's lawyers have been doing throughout the trial.

    At one point, the PowerPoint presentation the Government's lawyers were using failed to play audio, with the Judge noting that they weren't using a Mac.
    Snyder's final slide shows an iPad with the text "It's time to close the book on this case".

    The Department of Justice has argued that Apple was the "ringmaster" of a scheme to raise e-book pricing across the industry. The government says Apple convinced publishing companies to work together to set pricing above the $9.99 price point that Amazon was selling books at before the iPad came out. The DOJ's slide deck is available from AllThingsD as well.

    U.S. District Judge Denise Cote is expected to have a final judgement within a few weeks. Both sides agreed to have a judge hear and decide on the case rather than present it to a jury.

    Article Link: Apple's Closing Arguments Concludes E-Book Price Fixing Trial
     
  2. macrumors 6502a

    SamGabbay

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2011
    #2
    Love how it's embedded in flash

    :rolleyes:
     
  3. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2008
    Location:
    Auckland, New Zealand
    #3
    Love how the Calendar shots have the stitched leather .. this wasn't done in Mavericks :D.
     
  4. macrumors 6502

    ka-spot

    Joined:
    May 23, 2012
    #4
    So the new Macbook Pro Retina 13" is hardly knocking on the door?
     
  5. NOV
    macrumors 6502

    NOV

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2004
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    #5
    e-book? e-Book? E-Book? eBook?
     
  6. macrumors 68000

    Lancer

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2002
    Location:
    Australia
    #6
    Love that the PowerPoint didn't work :lol:
     
  7. macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #7
    The litigation has been going on for months. This was just the trial.
     
  8. macrumors 68000

    AZREOSpecialist

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2009
    #8
    I love how our DOJ has time to waste suing Apple over something it never did, yet apparently does nothing when voters have to wait in line for 8 hours in Florida to cast a ballot, when states try to change voter registration rules two months before a national election and then try to eliminate early voting or limit the voting hours, when some states are trying to change how the electoral college votes are awarded from those states, when legislatures across the country are gerrymandering districts in a way to ensure that the popular vote won't decide the winner of an election.

    Where is the DOJ when it comes to enforcing the ADA and FCC rules against companies like Apple, Netflix, Amazon, Vudu and others who resist making closed captions or subtitles available for those who are deaf or hearing impaired? There are so many things that the DOJ should be focusing on, and Apple is not one of them. This is the most ridiculous waste of taxpayer dollars I've witnessed since the $400 Pentagon toilet seat.
     
  9. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2005
    Location:
    Western North Carolina
    #9
    iPad with cellular

    Anyone notice the last 3 slides have the iPad with the cellular antenna, instead of the wifi-only model? That's new...normally when showing off the iPad, they use the wifi model, since it's a bit cleaner without that black area at the top for the cell antenna!
     
  10. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2011
    #10
    They should have put the Horatio meme in the last slide.
     
  11. macrumors 601

    HiRez

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    Western US
    #11
    It's mind-boggling how this case was ever brought. DOJ seems completely inept and clearly didn't do their research on this, didn't even understand what they were suing over.
     
  12. iWatch, Jun 20, 2013
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2013

    macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2013
    #12
    Only a hardcore "fanboy" would think apple did absolutely nothing wrong here.
    They obviously conspired with the big publishers at driving up the e-book prices in such a manner that Amazon would either have to sign a new contract or be blacklisted by the major publishers.

    That is illegal.
     
  13. macrumors 68020

    jayducharme

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Location:
    The thick of it
    #13
    Ouch! :eek:

    I hope that doesn't throw the trial because the judge is biased in favor of Apple. :)
     
  14. macrumors 68000

    JGowan

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2003
    #14
    It's not obvious. Did you page through the 140 or court demonstratives to arrive at that conclusion. Amazon had no right to put publishers in the position they were with "windowed" books and setting ridiculous prices of $9.99. Apple will come out of this smelling like a rose.
     
  15. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2010
    Location:
    London / Norwich (UK)
    #15
    Actually, it makes perfect sense to me. I'll have to read over Apple's evidence tomorrow but from what I have seen so far it seems very clear that Apple wanted to enter the eBook market and to get people on board they wanted to use Agency pricing with benefits publishers and Apple.... everyone but Amazon.
     
  16. macrumors 68020

    kkat69

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta, Ga
    #16
    If Steve were alive he'd finish the summation with "But there's just one more thing..."
     
  17. macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2008
    #17
    Haha, that would conclude the case. ;-)

    When I saw the first slide I almost expected a keynote-style presentation, but most of the slides are really cheesy. Good thing lawyers are not hired for design skills.
     
  18. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2008
    Location:
    Ireland
    #18
    That's pretty cool that SJ read websites like these. I always presumed they would but this confirms it!
     
  19. macrumors 68040

    the8thark

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2011
    #19
    Seems someone is a fan of these two people.

    [​IMG][​IMG]

    ----------

    Only if the judge is competent enough to realise this.
     
  20. macrumors 6502a

    lolkthxbai

    Joined:
    May 7, 2011
    #20
    LOL the stiching on his shirt...
     
  21. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2010
    #21
    I read through all of the slides. What's MFN?
     
  22. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2008
    #22
    Good God. Trial slideshows are universally the ugliest things ever.
     
  23. macrumors 6502a

    springsup

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2013
    #23
    Most Favored Nation. It means that if anyone else is getting the book cheaper than Apple gets the book, Apple can lower their price to match the other guy.
     
  24. macrumors G5

    gnasher729

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    #24
    If you call people who dare to disagree with you "hardcore 'fanboy'", what does that make you?

    And when you see "they obviously conspired", what you really mean is "there is absolutely no evidence of any conspiracy, or any cooperation".
     
  25. iWatch, Jun 20, 2013
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2013

    macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2013
    #25
    I'm not saying anyone who disagrees with me is a hardcore fanboy.
    I am saying there are plenty of hardcore fanboys.
    I've seen kids & adults alike act childish with their beliefs. And they will, until the day they are dead, continue with false beliefs.
    Those are fanboys.
    Fanboys are those who follow a product, manufacturer or a person to such an extent that they are loyal to that entity. The entity can never do wrong...even when all evidence points to the contrary.

    I've been following this case since day one. I've read every piece of legal document available to the public and it is crystal clear that Apple (as much as I enjoy their products) conspired with the big publishers to increase e-book prices in a strategy to make amazon "play nice".
    Nobody in their right mind can deny those facts exist.
    That is why the DOJ brought forth this case.
    The question is whether or not a judge will "feel" for the plight of the publishers against the "presumed" harmful acts of amazon.
     

Share This Page