Without someone willing to take less profit, capitalism doesn't work. It is illegal to price fix, period.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
U.S. Department of Justice Sues Apple and Publishers over E-Book Pricing
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Without someone willing to take less profit, capitalism doesn't work. It is illegal to price fix, period.
Yes, well spotted, no one here thinks this is a good thing.
Oh, wait.
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/14702258/
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/14702263/
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/14702267/
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/14702275/
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/14702281/
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/14702308/
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/14702337/
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/14702388/
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/14702400/
Just because prices go down it does not always mean it is a good thing. I know a lot of people in the publishing industry and many of them have been laid off over the past few years as Amazon has exacted lower and lower prices from them which they have to accept since amazon accounts for so much of their sales. There is also a constant worry that they will loose their jobs. So Apple comes along in this emerging sales channel and says hey we want to sell these for more, but that will only work if you make it impossible for anyone to beat our price, but we have the clout to make a ton of sales how does that sound to you. Collusion by definition sure, but at the end of the day better than struggling to stay in business.
Not if it hurts the publishers. It's already a declining business. If publishers lose sales, they'll be less likely to publish newer authors. Everything you see will be written by Stephen King or Stephenie Meyer
Oh please, independents will do better without publishers. Publishers screw authors. Authors have put up with it until now because authors can't afford their own printing presses. Now that authors are free to sell their material directly to readers via Amazon or Apple, they're making vastly more money.
Source? My mother has been an author for over twenty years. Up until two or three years ago, she was bringing in ~$10K/year. It was nice, but obviously not enough to support the family alone. My dad was bringing in ~100K/year; he was the one supporting the family. Then my mom started selling on Amazon. Now she makes ~$100K/year, as well. And then my dad got laid off. Were it not for Amazon's support for independent authors, our family would have been screwed. As it is, we can make it through with a little less while dad searches for a new job.
Investigate gas prices and they'll jump another $1/gallon on 'market speculation'. Also the people that investigate gas prices are probably being sent a monthly check by the oil companies, so....
That article conveniently omits any reference to Apple insisting that publishers are not allowed to let rival retailers sell the same book at a lower price.
very little of the cost of a book is the actual physical printing (a common misconception) most books are printed for pennies on the dollar. Getting a book published is alot more difficult with alot more people involved than you would think.
You do realize the DOJ has the capability to handle more than one case at a time right?
Chalk it up to ignorance. People look at what Apple did with music on iTunes and assume they are doing the same with Ebook prices. Unfortunately, they did exactly the reverse. Instead of entering into the market and causing prices to be lowered, Apple came into the market and colluded to raise prices.
Publishers are going to die either way. What your mother is doing is the future.
And in that future Amazon will tell your mother what she has to charge. The government is apparently suspicious of a method whereby your mother can go online and set her own prices.
Shouldn't your mother be able to sell her book at whatever price she wants to? I'm concerned that the DOJ seems to think that's a bad idea.
I can't believe how much ******** is in this post. Learn to use lose/loose proper PLEASE.
Collussion is better than struggling to stay in business? Collusion just like conspiracy is ILLEGAL. Price fixing is ILLEGAL.
Did you have this same argument when the music industry was bitching about digital music? Were you willing to pay $16 for a digital album, the same price of a physical CD?
The industry is CHANGING. The publishers need to ADAPT to the changing technology or they will die. It's the evolution of business!
Your precious Apple and iTunes removed MANY MANY music businesses from the market. But that was OK right?
The hypocrisy in your post is truly astounding.
Of course it's terrible when people lose jobs, but the industry needs to adapt.
Just like people were NOT willing to pay a high price for music, the same will be true for SOME ebooks. Maybe if publishers charged a good price on a phsyical book that INCLUDES the ebook people would buy into that. There are many other options they can pursue.
To jusitfy collusion and price fixing is ridiculous.
Last edited:
Not if they are just solidifying Amazon's stranglehold on the market. It also isn't good news for authors and publishers.
How can they get this so *utterly* wrong?! They should most definitely not be suing apple. They should be suing apple, amazon, and all of the publishers, and their intended outcome should be this: DRM free ebooks that can be bought at any store and read on any device.
As it is, I simply refuse to buy any ebooks. If I buy from apple, and in 5 years I no longer have an apple device, what happens to the ebook? I can't read it. What happens if apple no longer supports ebooks (don't laugh - this happened with MP3s, some people lost entire collections because they bought DRM'd music and the company dropped support). Most of all: what happens when I want to lend (or give) a book to a friend? What happens when I've finished with it and give it to the charity shop?
I wouldn't mind the DRM if it was standardised across all companies + devices, so long as it gave me confidence the book will still work in 10 years and that it has the same features as a paper book (i.e. I can lend it, give it away, or sell it 2nd hand).
Prices would be much lower if that happened, because if I could buy the books at either amazon or apple or wherever else and read them on a tablet, a kindle or a desktop computer... I'd shop at the cheapest place, and they'd have to compete on price.
As it is, I simply refuse to buy any ebooks. If I buy from apple, and in 5 years I no longer have an apple device, what happens to the ebook? I can't read it. What happens if apple no longer supports ebooks (don't laugh - this happened with MP3s, some people lost entire collections because they bought DRM'd music and the company dropped support). Most of all: what happens when I want to lend (or give) a book to a friend? What happens when I've finished with it and give it to the charity shop?
I wouldn't mind the DRM if it was standardised across all companies + devices, so long as it gave me confidence the book will still work in 10 years and that it has the same features as a paper book (i.e. I can lend it, give it away, or sell it 2nd hand).
Prices would be much lower if that happened, because if I could buy the books at either amazon or apple or wherever else and read them on a tablet, a kindle or a desktop computer... I'd shop at the cheapest place, and they'd have to compete on price.
I'm not sure what collussion is, but whether or not Apple and the publishers engaged in collusion remains to be seen.
It seems to me that Apple's deal with the book publishers wasn't greatly different from its deal with music publishers. They can set whatever price they want, so long as they always offer Apple the lowest price, and Apple gets their 30% commission.
There's nothing inherently anti-competitive about the agency model. It's one form of pricing model. There's nothing inherently "better" about the wholesale model, either. The agency model was a way for Apple, who was a new entry into both the music and book industries, to gain acceptance and strike deals with the content providers. At the end of the day, it's the content that's the most important. Apple couldn't compete on price, and they don't compete on price in any of their other markets, either. Instead, they offered a service that played to their strengths. That's called being competitive.
Books need to be cheaper, and the authors need to get at least 80% of the profits. Publishers are like the music industry where they take most of the profits. The major role Apple, Amazon or anyone else should play is to keep the ebook secure for the author to prevent piracy.
I wonder what will happen to college books once they go digital. Will they be cheaper or more expensive.
I wonder what will happen to college books once they go digital. Will they be cheaper or more expensive.
Welcome to the MR forums, cateye.
I didn't know a lot about this issue 8 weeks ago, but I have recently educated myself. Things are hardly as black-and-white as you portray them.
Since you didn't say "IANAL", should we presume you are a lawyer?
That would be an Apples-to-Amazons comparison. Just FYI: e-book sales is a minuscule part of Apple's business. As this report from Q1 FY2012 shows, Apple's iTunes Store sales is only 4% of their gross revenue. iTunes Store sales includes music, iOS App Store sales, Mac App Store sales, and e-Books. It's safe to say that e-Book sales is far less than 1% of Apple's total sales. Compare to Amazon: retail sales is essentially 100% of their business and e-book sales is a healthy chunk of that.
Well, if the DOJ finds nothing and Apple is not found guilty then of course this is all fine and dandy.
How quickly we forget the lessons learned in recent years.
Didn't we already go through this with physical/digital versions of music, movies and software?
The digital distribution model lends itself to lower prices from a manufacturing standpoint. This is not even a debatable point. Fixing the prices at levels equal or above the cost of physical media is reprehensible. Apple colluding with the publishers to do this in a move to hurt all who sell e-books (specifically Amazon) is one that hurts the consumer.
Didn't we already go through this with physical/digital versions of music, movies and software?
The digital distribution model lends itself to lower prices from a manufacturing standpoint. This is not even a debatable point. Fixing the prices at levels equal or above the cost of physical media is reprehensible. Apple colluding with the publishers to do this in a move to hurt all who sell e-books (specifically Amazon) is one that hurts the consumer.