I buy all my e-books from Amazon anyway since with iBooks you're restricted to Apple's own devices. Amazon has better sales, better selection, and a wider range of devices to read them on. That the settlement will benefit both me as a consumer and the place I buy the books from is a very good thing. Glad to see Apple get a beatdown over this anti-consumer policy of theirs.
If you read the Guardian article I linked to, it is the publishers, not Apple, who the DOJ is seeking to beat down. Apple agreed to the agency model since they were the newcomer to the market, and unlike Amazon their business model doesn't support them selling content at a loss.
As a consumer, it is in your long term interest for there to be a healthy market with multiple players. It doesn't benefit you if Amazon gains control over the market, since at that point they will have less incentive to price books competitively, or at a level that sustains an adequate supply.
----------
A big presumption. If Amazon is in fact engaging in predatory pricing, then they'd run afoul of the antitrust laws too.
Not necessarily. Anti-dumping laws are not particularly strong in the US (not that I'm against that).
Ultimately, who gets hurt in all of this are the authors, who don't get paid as much if their publishers lose margin. Perhaps the market will eventually develop to a point where authors can realistically sell content directly to e-retailers, much as how the app market has developed, but books are a bit more complicated than apps. For starters, there is still demand for physical books. For various reasons, publishers still serve a vital role, and it isn't necessarily in the customer's interest for a single party like Amazon to get too much control, and be able to use the force of the DOJ to get them to negotiate its way out of contracts with publishers that it didn't like.