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

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

  1. MacRumors macrumors bot


    Apr 12, 2001

    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. needfx macrumors 68040


    Aug 10, 2010
    macrumors apparently
    if it pleases the court (i.e. the mods)

    Attached Files:

  3. LaDirection macrumors 6502

    Jul 14, 2006
    Remember when there used to be good news about Apple?
  4. Plutonius macrumors 603


    Feb 22, 2003
    New Hampshire
    The publishers are supporting Apple.
  5. ValSalva macrumors 68040


    Jun 26, 2009
    Burpelson AFB
    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.
  6. Glideslope macrumors 601


    Dec 7, 2007
    "Trust the Government. It worked well for the Indians". ;)
  7. Rennir macrumors 6502

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

    Jun 17, 2009
    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.
  9. Ochyandkaren macrumors 6502

    Apr 3, 2010
    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.
  10. Shaun, UK macrumors 68030

    Mar 23, 2006
    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.
  11. tigres macrumors 68040


    Aug 31, 2007
    Land of the Free-Waiting for Term Limits
    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.
  12. Ochyandkaren macrumors 6502

    Apr 3, 2010
    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
  13. Tknull macrumors regular

    Jun 24, 2011
    San Diego
    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?
  14. Aidyn's X macrumors regular

    Mar 25, 2010
    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.
  15. Michael Goff macrumors G3

    Michael Goff

    Jul 5, 2012

    Amazon bought off the entire DOJ?
  16. MWPULSE macrumors 6502a


    Dec 27, 2008
    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.


    *keeps reading articles about case outta boredom*

  17. ConCat macrumors 6502a


    Jul 27, 2012
    In an ethereal plane of existence.
    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.
  18. Rogifan macrumors P6


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


    Jul 27, 2012
    In an ethereal plane of existence.
    This is the issue with government intrusion. BTW, this should really have been in PRSI.
  20. PracticalMac macrumors 68030


    Jan 22, 2009
    Houston, TX
    How does this benefit Apple?
    I can see this part not hurting apple. But help?
  21. Thalesian macrumors member

    May 12, 2009
    Albuquerque, NM
    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.
  22. garylapointe, Aug 7, 2013
    Last edited: Aug 7, 2013

    garylapointe macrumors 65816


    Feb 19, 2006
    Dearborn (Detroit), MI, USA
    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.

  23. Consultant macrumors G5


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


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

Share This Page