Publishers in E-Book Antitrust Case File Objection to DOJ's Proposed Punishment for Apple

Discussion in 'MacRumors.com News Discussion' started by MacRumors, Aug 7, 2013.

  1. macrumors bot

    MacRumors

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


    [​IMG]
    The five book publishers who settled with the U.S. Government in the e-book antitrust case have filed an objection with the court arguing that the Department of Justice's proposed punishments for Apple would violate their settlement agreements from before the trial began, according to The Wall Street Journal.

    The DOJ has recommended that the "agency model" deals with publishers be nullified and that Apple require competitors such as Amazon to put direct purchase links to their own e-book stores inside their iOS apps. Some experts have said that Apple could owe as much as $500 million in penalties.
    Apple has consistently defended its behavior and called the DOJ's proposal a "draconian and punitive intrusion into Apple's business".

    Article Link: Publishers in E-Book Antitrust Case File Objection to DOJ's Proposed Punishment for Apple
     
  2. macrumors 68030

    needfx

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Location:
    macrumors apparently
    #2
    if it pleases the court (i.e. the mods)
     

    Attached Files:

  3. macrumors 68040

    braddick

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2009
    Location:
    Encinitas, CA
    #3
    Not cool.
     
  4. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2006
    #4
    Remember when there used to be good news about Apple?
     
  5. macrumors 601

    Plutonius

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2003
    Location:
    New Hampshire
    #5
    The publishers are supporting Apple.
     
  6. macrumors 68040

    ValSalva

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2009
    Location:
    Burpelson AFB
    #6
    The publishers aren't really siding with Apple. They are looking out for their best interests. The DOJ prevents Apple from using the agency model. The publishers want the agency model. Apple is almost an unintended beneficiary in this instance.
     
  7. macrumors 68040

    Glideslope

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2007
    Location:
    NY
    #7
    "Trust the Government. It worked well for the Indians". ;)
     
  8. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2012
    #8
    Yeah Obama vetoing the ban on Apple products definitely doesn't garner trust.
     
  9. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2009
    #9
    Wow, now that Amazon has almost completed its task of putting every B&M bookstore out of business, the government steps in to make sure their slash-and-burn business model survives in the digital market as well.
     
  10. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2010
    Location:
    Lisbon
    #10
    Wrong analogy. But It worked well for those who elected said government.

    These days, any government care less about the people.
    Fake pundits are there to soothe the people, while the government please corporations.

    ----------

    Obama’s guys are in the Amazon’s pocket.
     
  11. macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2006
    #11
    Don't understand why this case is so hard to solve. All the DoJ have to do is get Apple to remove the clause from their agency agreements that prevents the publishers from selling their eBooks through Amazon at a lower price. If Apple wants to make 30% margin on eBook sales that's fine. If Amazon want to make 5% margin and sell the eBooks much cheaper that's up to them. It's a free market. Ultimately customers will decide who gets their money.
     
  12. macrumors 68040

    tigres

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2007
    Location:
    Land of the Free-Waiting for Term Limits
    #12
    Your thinking way to logical.

    We need a committee of at least 100 govt workers and a hearing to conclude what you did on a forum in 2 years time.
     
  13. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2010
    Location:
    Lisbon
    #13
    Fair Trading?


    Yeah, it is a free market.

    We are human beings, do not forget that.

    ----------

    Explaining the Apple Ebook Price Fixing Suit by Adam C. Engst for tidbitsDOTcom
     
  14. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2011
    Location:
    San Diego
    #14
    Can someone explain the governments logic in this whole thing to me..... The crux of the whole situation, as I see it:

    1) Publisher sets price..... nothing much to complain about in re Apple on this

    2) Apple negotiated a clause that said that if the Publisher allowed a different seller to sell a given book for a price lower than what it told Apple to sell it for that Apple could lower their price to match said price

    3) So the whole situation that Apple fought for and won in the negotiation was the ability to LOWER prices

    4) So how is what Apple doing in any way hurting the consumer? Publisher sets price. Is the government actually upset that Apple would want to lower the price if they could?

    ----------

    My understanding was that the clause Apple had did not prevent a publisher from selling a book on Amazon or any other store for a lower price. It merely said that if it did, Apple could lower the price on their store as well.

    So your solution merely forces Apple to sell for a higher price than it would prefer to sell for. How is that good for consumers?
     
  15. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    #15
    I had to scroll too far down to find the article. I'll just make a blanket statement based on no facts at all:

    Apple is both greedy and has the American government in their pockets while at the same time they fight the American government on the eBook pricing scandal in which they try to give publishers (including private authors) the freedom to sell works they own at prices they find fair while Apple asks for 30% like they do for anything else they sell... the big jerks.
     
  16. macrumors 603

    Michael Goff

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2012
    #16
    Really?

    Amazon bought off the entire DOJ?
     
  17. macrumors 6502a

    MWPULSE

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2008
    Location:
    London
    #17
    well this just made it interesting again... I wonder how on earth this is gonna play out! ;)

    I won't pretend to understand the entirety of the case, but it doesn't seem like Apple did anything wrong particularly.

    hmmm

    *keeps reading articles about case outta boredom*

    :apple:
     
  18. macrumors 6502a

    ConCat

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2012
    Location:
    In an ethereal plane of existence.
    #18
    You don't have to buy off "the entire DOJ" in order to buy off the DOJ. It happens all the time. No clue if Amazon has, but it wouldn't surprise me.
     
  19. macrumors G5

    Rogifan

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2011
    #19
    Ok which one of these scenarios was the real deal?
     
  20. macrumors 6502a

    ConCat

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2012
    Location:
    In an ethereal plane of existence.
    #20
    This is the issue with government intrusion. BTW, this should really have been in PRSI.
     
  21. macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    #21
    How does this benefit Apple?
    I can see this part not hurting apple. But help?
     
  22. macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Location:
    Albuquerque, NM
    #22
    As a protest against anti-trust charges that book publishers colluded with Apple to raise prices, book publishers collude with Apple to challenge US court ruling. Seems to check out.
     
  23. garylapointe, Aug 7, 2013
    Last edited: Aug 7, 2013

    macrumors 6502a

    garylapointe

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2006
    Location:
    Dearborn (Detroit), MI, USA
    #23
    Apple lets publishers sell their ebooks via the app. Apple just wants their 30% as with every other item that is sold through apps. This is in the contract that the people who write apps agree to.

    Everyone can buy whatever book from Amazon (or Nook or Kobo) they want via the web while on their iOS device. They don't need to be in the app to buy them. I think they should be able to have a link to their site in the app (not direct links to each individual book).

    Apple needs to just break out their iBook division and charge them 30% so that they are being the same to all book sellers.

    Gary
     
  24. macrumors G5

    Consultant

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2007
    #24
    So publishers looked at Amazon's predatory monopoly and grew some spines?
     
  25. macrumors 68020

    ugahairydawgs

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    #25
    Looking for the bold is where you generally find the most problem.
     

Share This Page