Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple had A Gore on their board. Steve was an avowed liberal. Hmmm, both those ideas consider government interference with businesses a good thing. Hmmmm. Karma?

As I alluded to earlier, a lot of people got suckered in by a smooth talker that told them what they wanted to hear. (Wait until the unions find out their companies can save money dumping their health plans, pushing them into the state exchanges.)

Too bad the other side can't field a pair of electable candidates to save their lives.

They haven't gotten anything. "Following the Department of Justice's release of a proposed remedy"

BIG difference.

Get back to me when the judge deviates from the script.
 

Interesting article, Zargot.

I guess after this, Apple might finally learn its lesson: Mega-corporations are OBLIGATED to pay bribe/lobby money to its national politicians in order to survive.

The Samsung chaebol (mafia-like cartel) is many steps ahead of Apple here, because Samsung is notorious for not only lining the pockets of many South Korean parliament officials, Samsung political influence is so legendary, it's been noted that the previous SK Prime Ministers that attempted to curtail or "clean up" Samsung's corrupting political influence were thrown out of office and thereafter disgraced.
 
And those idiots at congress try to encourage business to stay in US OF A.
What freaking morons.
Doj should be sued for harming US economy!

Draconian is an understatement... Such is life with our present administration.
The end does not justify the means. You cannot condone collusion and price fixing in the name of "more competitive market" any more that you cannot condone patent infringement ala Samsung. They are enforcing the rule of law which is a good way to encourage business staying, or at least business which is willing to compete on merit without using unlawful practices.
 
The USPS is a private entity... has been for decades. It is self funded.
It is not tax payer funded, but still under partial control of Congress as required by the Constitution.
They are going broke because Congress mandated they pay 75 years worth of retirement benefits into the pension fund in advance.
They would actually be making a profit if it weren't for the ridiculous pension prepayment requirement.
Their losses are politically inflicted by Congress and the Letter Carrier's Union. Another shining example of labor unions bleeding their employers into bankruptcy.

Yes, while you are technically correct about the private status of the USPS, don't think for a minute that the tax payers are not on the hook for their massive debt. They are only private through political sleight of hand. Please follow this link for further information.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-04-13/guest-post-great-postal-fraud
 
They haven't gotten anything. "Following the Department of Justice's release of a proposed remedy"

BIG difference.
Yes, it hasn't happened yet, and may not, but it's quite a bit different from what happened with the MS case in which, after the initial judge's remedy got tossed, the DoJ itself decided not to go after breaking up the company and in fact let MS write its own remedy.

The proportional response in how the DoJ pursued penalties, given that it was victorious in court in both cases, is wildly different.
 
Good on Apple, shame on the Justice Department for this witch hunt.

It's an absolutely absurd ruling and the US should be ashamed.

I'm sure that the Justice Department will require Amazon to link to the iBookstore too, right? Right? Oh, that's right.. they're fine with THAT.

And we're all thrilled with "made in America" for WHAT reason?
 
They can and they have. Welcome to America.

There's nothing more American than buying politicians. Just business as usual in Washington.

And they love it when people 'debate' points of law and policy. It keeps us nice and distracted while they count their money :D
 
obviously Apple has not provided sufficient political donations to the correct campaigns
 
http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2013/August/13-at-877.html

The department’s proposal, if approved by the court, will require Apple to terminate its existing agreements with the five major publishers with which it conspired – Hachette Book Group (USA), HarperCollins Publishers L.L.C., Holtzbrinck Publishers LLC, which does business as Macmillan, Penguin Group (USA) Inc. and Simon & Schuster Inc. – and to refrain for five years from entering new e-book distribution contracts which would restrain Apple from competing on price. Under the department’s proposed remedy, Apple will be prohibited from again serving as a conduit of information among the conspiring publishers or from retaliating against publishers for refusing to sell e-books on agency terms. Apple will also be prohibited from entering into agreements with suppliers of e-books, music, movies, television shows or other content that are likely to increase the prices at which Apple’s competitor retailers may sell that content. To reset competition to the conditions that existed before the conspiracy, Apple must also for two years allow other e-book retailers like Amazon and Barnes & Noble to provide links from their e-book apps to their e-bookstores, allowing consumers who purchase and read e-books on their iPads and iPhones easily to compare Apple’s prices with those of its competitors.

If the above quote is accurate, this is the killer:

Apple will also be prohibited from entering into agreements with suppliers of e-books, music, movies, television shows or other content that are likely to increase the prices at which Apple’s competitor retailers may sell that content.

Apple may as well close down the iTunes store.
 
There are two huge problems u close your eyes to!
The judge was prejudice to the outcome f the trial before it even started!
Huge problem.
The ruling is totally absurd, oneway, biased, tyrannical and dangerous .
Who the hell is the doj to think they have the right to monitor very iTunes business deal apple conducts in music, movies etc... And say yey or ney! Do u even come close to understanding how tyrannical this is..
Who the hell is doj to tell apple how to set up its business policy .. By forcing them to allow links to the competition .
Who the hell are they to say apple is subject to these.. But the competition is not!
These ruling has ex soviet union written all over it!

And then it is ok for the ruling to empower amazon to drive all other book retailers out of business and become a monopoly! It is hypocritical...shortsighted and stupid !

Let alone how this case has extortion written all over it projected by the judges prejudice before even the case started !

Man! You need to take a chill pill and drink less caffeine... There's not a shred of evidence in what you're saying and the majority of the posting is but FUD!..

----------

Good on Apple, shame on the Justice Department for this witch hunt.

What witch hunt?

It's an absolutely absurd ruling and the US should be ashamed.

Why is it absurd, and why should the US be ashamed?

I'm sure that the Justice Department will require Amazon to link to the iBookstore too, right? Right? Oh, that's right.. they're fine with THAT.

So far as I know, there's absolutely nothing in force now nor existed before which prevented Apple from putting an App on Amazon with a link to iBookstore or any part of iTMS for that matter...
 
I completely understand this. What part of that is not fair? Again, if you and your family opened a widget selling business, would you want the widget manufacturer to sell widgets for a lower price than what they sold it to your family's business?

That happens all the time. Walmart sells goods for a lower price than many small independents can buy the same goods because Walmart buy and sell in bulk. Sorry but it's not illegal. It's just open free capitalism.

Apple can't stop Amazon selling cheap eBooks just because Apple doesn't want to match Amazon's low margins or loss leaders. Ok that's fine - Apple shouldn't sell eBooks in that case.

Apple used their dominant position in the tablet market to force up eBook prices in collusion with the eBook publishers. That's so clearly anti-competitive.

----------

Funny how some people to seem to think that anyone who disagrees with Apple is either stupid or corrupt. Talk about paranoia.
 
Man! You need to take a chill pill and drink less caffeine... There's not a shred of evidence in what you're saying and the majority of the posting is but FUD!..

----------



What witch hunt?



Why is it absurd, and why should the US be ashamed?





So far as I know, there's absolutely nothing in force now nor existed before which prevented Apple from putting an App on Amazon with a link to iBookstore or any part of iTMS for that matter...

Not a shred of evidence.? Lol
Go read numerous articles in circulation about the dojs ruling before you talk about chill pills or caffeine as a copout !
So many just babble and don't even bother to read facts before they do!
Mind boggeling.
 
People keep saying eBooks prices went up because of Apple...

But for the last 5 years, Gas prices went up, Food prices went up, Electricity bills went up, and everything else went up... is that also because of Apple?

Publishers already decided they weren't happy with Amazon and wanted to raise their prices. And the only thing Apple did request is to get the same prices than anyone else to be sure an eBook won't be sell lower than the Apple price.

They didn't fix the price, they asked to get the same prices by using the Agency model.

I just don't get it, this case just looks completely absurd and will now give Amazon the full monopoly on eBooks. So much for Capitalism and Freedom of choices...

I suggest you take a look at the definitions for inflation and Supply/Demand vs collusion.

You should notice a big difference and it will also give you the answer to your question.
 
Are higher prices a benefit to consumers? No

I actually disagree with this. Nobody *wants* to pay higher prices, including me, but higher prices have allowed for better quality products and that *IS* good for consumers and the world as a whole.

The world is filled with way too much junk made and sold at the lowest possible price, but the cost of that model is hurting our world. It's filled with junk that needs to be replaced far more often.
 
I wonder what this board would be like if another company entered into an agreement that say, forced higher prices on all movies in iTunes, and Apple had no say in it ?
 
I think Apple should exit the e-book market entirely. Focus on the software for reading the e-books, but don't get mixed up in this crazy low-margin business. It's not worth it.
 
I actually disagree with this. Nobody *wants* to pay higher prices, including me, but higher prices have allowed for better quality products and that *IS* good for consumers and the world as a whole.

The world is filled with way too much junk made and sold at the lowest possible price, but the cost of that model is hurting our world. It's filled with junk that needs to be replaced far more often.

Umh... no? Has higher gas prices made gas any better? Has higher bank fees made bank services any better? Has higher grocery price made our food any better? Has higher sports admission tickets made the sport any more entertaining?

The only reason book publishers wanted to raise prices was to raise physical book sales, not for ''the good of customers'' :p
 
My wife's law firm worked on this case. And here's what's going on:

Apple wants publishers to set their own prices for their books.

Amazon on the other hand, wants to sell books below cost, thus strong arming writers and publishers into selling only to Amazon, since no one would wanna buy a book that costs more. Amazon in turn, will incur losses at first, but would later have established a greater monopoly and pushed away other online bookseller. Amazon can then reap profits by charging whatever they want.

It’s a dirty technique, and the DOJ sided with it. Just goes to show how corrupt lawyers and judges can be.
 
It’s a dirty technique, and the DOJ sided with it. Just goes to show how corrupt lawyers and judges can be.

As dirty as it is, it is not illegal and evidence has shown that even though Amazon sells *some* ebooks at a loss, their business model has been profitable for them.

This has nothing to do with corruption, acting on the contrary would show corruption.

Lot of people here have to learn to put their emotions aside and look at the cold facts.

----------

Oh and for those that think the Obama's administration is out there to destroy Apple:

http://www.theverge.com/2013/8/3/45...msung-patent-ban-on-iphone-4-and-select-ipads
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.