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

[MacRumors]

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.

"Apple did not conspire with a single publisher to fix prices in the e-book industry," Snyder said, arguing that the negotiations under scrutiny in this case were nothing more than "standard, lawful business activity." And the DOJ's claim that they were more than that, a nefarious plot over which Apple served as ringmaster, is entirely unsupported. "All of the government's evidence is ambiguous at best," Snyder argued, lambasting the DOJ's case as one built on "word games and inferences."

​

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

 

[SamGabbay]

Love how it's embedded in flash

 

[MartiNZ]

Love how the Calendar shots have the stitched leather .. this wasn't done in Mavericks .

 

[ka-spot]

So the new Macbook Pro Retina 13" is hardly knocking on the door?

 

[NOV]

e-book? e-Book? E-Book? eBook?

 

[Lancer]

Love that the PowerPoint didn't work :lol:

 

[IJ Reilly]

The litigation has been going on for months. This was just the trial.

 

[AZREOSpecialist]

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.

 

[vjl323]

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!

 

[komodrone]

They should have put the Horatio meme in the last slide.

 

[HiRez]

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.

 

[iWatch]

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.

 

[jayducharme]

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.

Ouch!

I hope that doesn't throw the trial because the judge is biased in favor of Apple.

 

[JGowan]

Only a "fanboy" would think apple did no 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.

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.

 

[Sheza]

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.

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.

 

[kkat69]

If Steve were alive he'd finish the summation with "But there's just one more thing..."

 

[KALLT]

If Steve were alive he'd finish the summation with "But there's just one more thing..."

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.

 

[JDee]

With more evidence being released to the public, a particularly interesting correspondence revealed Jobs read certain Apple-centric websites to gain further perspective on his company's dealings.

That's pretty cool that SJ read websites like these. I always presumed they would but this confirms it!

 

[the8thark]

Love how it's embedded in flash

Love how the Calendar shots have the stitched leather .. this wasn't done in Mavericks .

Seems someone is a fan of these two people.

----------

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.

Only if the judge is competent enough to realise this.

 

[lolkthxbai]

Seems someone is a fan of these two people.

ImageImage

----------


Only if the judge is competent enough to realise this.

LOL the stiching on his shirt...

 

[whocaresit]

I read through all of the slides. What's MFN?

 

[Brandon Abell]

Good God. Trial slideshows are universally the ugliest things ever.

 

[springsup]

I read through all of the slides. What's MFN?

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.

 

[gnasher729]

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.

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".

 

[iWatch]

If you call people who dare to disagree with you "hardcore 'fanboy'", what does that make you?

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.

And when you see "they obviously conspired", what you really mean is "there is absolutely no evidence of any conspiracy, or any cooperation".

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.