Apple's Antitrust E-Book Case Enters Appeals, Outlook Good for Apple

Apple's Antitrust E-Book Case Enters Appeals, Outlook Good for Apple - Mac Rumors (function(doc) { var viewport = document.getElementById('viewport'); if ( navigator.userAgent.match(/iPhone/i) || navigator.userAgent.match(/iPod/i)) { viewport.setAttribute("content", "width=device-width, user-scalable=yes"); } }(document)); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start': new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0], j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src= '//'+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f); })(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-NBTPJP'); Mac Rumors Got a tip for us? Let us know a. Send us an emailb. Anonymous formclose (x)             Front Page Mac Blog iOS Blog Roundups 12-Inch MacBook AirPort Apple Pay Apple TV Apple Watch iMac iOS 8 iOS 8 Features iPad Air 2 iPad mini 3 iPad Pro iPhone 6 iPod nano iPod shuffle iPod touch Mac mini Mac Pro MacBook Air MacBook Pro OS X Yosemite Thunderbolt Display Buyer's Guide Forums Facebook Twitter 12-Inch MacBook Apple Pay iPad Pro iPad Air 2 iPad mini 3 OS X Yosemite iMac Mac mini Apple Watch iOS 8 iOS 8 Features MacBook Air Mac Pro iPhone 6 Apple TV Thunderbolt Display MacBook Pro AirPort iPod nano iPod shuffle iPod touch All > Apple's Antitrust E-Book Case Enters Appeals, Outlook Good for Apple Monday December 15, 2014 1:15 PM PST by Juli Clover Upcoming Apple Watch Early 2015

Apple's Watch is designed to be both fashionable and functional.

12-Inch MacBook 2015

Thinner Retina 12" MacBook is in the works.

iPad Pro 2015

Larger iPad with display of 12-13 inches under development.

Front Page Stories Apple Pay Responsible for 1% of Digital Payment Dollars in November, Most Popular at Whole Foods 2 days ago on Front Page Apple Pay is seeing impressive early adoption numbers according to a new ITG Investment Research Report on Mobile Payments (via MarketWatch), which suggests Apple's new payment service was... 150 comments Kate Winslet May Take on Lead Female Role in Jobs Biopic 2 days ago on Front Page Actress Kate Winslet is currently in negotiations to play the lead female role in the upcoming Jobs biopic, reports Variety. Winslet, aged 39, is best known for dramatic movies like Titanic,... 75 comments Hands-On With Alpine's iLX-007 In-Dash CarPlay Entertainment System 2 days ago on Front Page While car manufacturers have been slower than anticipated to roll out support for Apple's in-vehicle CarPlay system, Pioneer and Alpine have delivered aftermarket options in the form of in-dash... 69 comments Tim Cook 'Deeply Offended' by BBC Documentary on Apple Factory Conditions 2 days ago on Front Page Apple CEO Tim Cook said he is deeply offended by allegations that Apple permits the mistreatment of workers in its supplier factories and mines, reports The Telegraph. The accusations were levied by... 404 comments iPhone 6 and 6 Plus Shipping Estimates Improve to 1 Business Day for 16 and 64GB Models 3 days ago on Front Page As the Christmas holiday approaches, Apple Store shipping estimates for both the iPhone 6 and the iPhone 6 Plus from all carriers in all colors and in 16 and 64GB capacities have now improved to just... 61 comments BBC Documentary Claims Apple Fails to Protect Chinese Factory Workers 3 days ago on Front Page Earlier this week, BBC One announced plans to air a documentary called Apple's Broken Promises, detailing the factory conditions of the overseas workers who are creating components and assembling... 453 comments Apple Seeds Third iOS 8.2 Beta to Developers 3 days ago on Front Page Apple today seeded the third beta of iOS 8.2 to developers, just over a week after seeding the second beta and one month after releasing the first iOS 8.2 beta. The beta, Build 12D5452a, is... 76 comments Duet Display Offers Tethered Solution to Turn an iPad into an Extra Display for Mac [Updated] 3 days ago on Front Page While there are several apps designed to turn the iPad or iPhone into a secondary display for a Mac, the most popular options use Wi-Fi, which can render them all but unusable at times due to... 151 comments • Hyundai Bringing New 'Display Audio' In-Dash System With Apple CarPlay to 2016 Models (28) • Apple's (Product) RED Holiday Campaign Raised $20 Million to Fight AIDS (64) • Job Listing Confirms Apple Pay Expansion is Underway, Led by London Team (57) • Judge Rules Steve Jobs Deposition Video Will Not See Public Release (32) • Apple Allows 'Drafts' App to Reinstate Notification Center Widget (67) • Apple Shares Behind the Scenes Look at New Holiday Ad 'The Song' (69) • 'Continuity Activation Tool' for Adding Handoff to Older Macs Now Supports Bluetooth 4.0 Dongles (82) Rumors by Product iPhone - iPad - iPad Mini - iPod
MacBook Pro - Retina MacBook Pro
MacBook Air
Mac mini - iMac - Mac Pro

Blogs: iPhone - Mac ibooks-iconLast year, Apple lost a monumental e-book antitrust case that alleged the company had colluded with publishers to raise the price of e-books. As a result, Apple was forced to submit to a cumbersome external antitrust monitor and the company agreed to pay out $450 million as part of a settlement with several class action lawyers and state district attorneys.

Throughout the lawsuit, Apple maintained its innocence, and in February, the company formally filed for an appeal, asking the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn the original ruling. In the appeal filing, Apple called the judge's decision a "radical departure" from modern antitrust law.

As of this week, Apple's case is being heard in appeals court, and it appears that things are going in the company's favor thus far. According to a report from Reuters, some of the judges "appeared sympathetic" to Apple's argument that its agreements with e-book publishers were "pro-competitive."

One of Apple's main arguments during the e-book antitrust case focused on Judge Cote's treatment of the company. Apple believes it was treated unfairly because Cote opted to ignore the positive impact that Apple had on introducing competition into the e-book market at a time when Amazon had a 90 percent market share.

Rather than being treated as a new entrant into the e-book market, which would have demanded a "rule of reason" analysis that judged Apple's impact on improving competition in a way that was good for consumers, Apple's role was viewed as "per se illegal" and automatically labeled anticompetitive despite Amazon's large command of the e-book market.
Circuit Judge Dennis Jacobs asked a Department of Justice lawyer why it was wrong for the publishers to get together to defeat a "monopolist" that was using "predatory pricing."

"It's like the mice getting together to put a bell on the cat," Jacobs said.
Circuit Judge Debra Livingston also said it was "troubling" that Apple's normally "perfectly legal" contracts were labeled as a scheme. A lawyer for Apple told the judges "We think the conduct here was innovative and pro-competitive." Should Apple win its appeal, it may not have to pay the $450 million settlement it reached in July. If the case is overturned, Apple will pay no fines, and if it's sent back to Judge Cote for a retrial, Apple will pay just $50 million to consumers and $20 million in attorney fees. 80 comments Top Rated Comments (View all) Avatar napabar 6 days ago at 01:31 pm What is this, Fox News?

Everything I am reading, Apple has no chance and the mountain of evidence that the original judge had is very sound.

Good luck Apple and Fast Eddie, tap dancing out of this one.

Are you daft? The case against Apple is weak. Did you not read the appellate judges comments? Even they are finding it hard to believe.

Come back when you actually have read the article and put your anti-Apple, anti-business bias to rest. Rating: 13 Votes Avatar Cuban Missles 6 days ago at 01:33 pm I never understood what Apple did that was wrong. I still don't. Clearly I am not a lawyer and I am sure there is some strange law that creates a technicality that is being employed. However, for the average Joe (or Jose in my case :D), what makes sense is that Apple came in and provided the first viable option to Amazon. And have prices or competition improved since they were found guilty? No.

I hope this appeal will at least clarify what the heck the crime was in Joe/Jose terms. Rating: 8 Votes Avatar thekeyring 6 days ago at 01:54 pm In a quick snapshot, here goes...

Amazon was selling ebooks, mostly for $9.99.

Jobs and Fast Eddie came up with a scheme to get into the ebook market for their new iPad, without having to compete with price (the last thing they wanted to do).
So they colluded with a bunch of publishers, who didn't like Amazon having so much control, to agree that the price would have to be set at $14.99, no sales, nothing.
If Amazon didn't like it, they couldn't sell the book at the price they wanted to.

And bad news for Apple, they caught Jobs on video admitting to it when asked about how to compete with Amazon, "it will cost the same".


Why is that illegal? Arguably, they were challenging Amazon's monopoly on ebooks, right? Rating: 6 Votes Avatar mw360 6 days ago at 02:01 pm Appellate judges? It was one of the three.

It was two of the three. Rating: 6 Votes Avatar Lazy 6 days ago at 02:00 pm Finally some sanity in a courtroom about this case. Rating: 5 Votes Avatar Iconoclysm 6 days ago at 02:30 pm But, but, but, a Judge prejudging a case before the trial has started is very bad, isn't?

This is an appeal...they're dealing directly with the DoJ...nice try!


Weak??? They lost the case! That is why they are appealling.

Keep drinking the Kool-aide.

If it wasn't weak somehow, there would be no appeal. Please hold the unnecessary laughter when you reply. Rating: 5 Votes Avatar mw360 6 days ago at 02:12 pm Ok, let me explain this in simple terms that might make it clear how this is a crime or at least could be construed as one.

I create a product called XYZ and sell it to Amazon for $7 each. Amazon then sells it for whatever price they want to sell it for, but I always get $4.99 each for them. Amazon can sell it below their cost for all I care, I get my money after all. But let's just say that Amazon was selling it for $8.

Now Apple comes along and says I will sell XYZ for whatever price you want me to sell it for, but I will take 30% to cover our costs and make a profit.

Ok, so far there is no problem here as far as the law is concerned, as it is simply a different business model that Apple chose to use.

So, I chose to sell through Apple for $9.99, which nets me slightly less than from Amazon, but I figure I will make enough sales to make up for the lower dollar amount. And I may not be able to go any cheaper due to my costs per unit.

But now, Apple comes in and says, oh but there's one more catch, you can't allow Amazon to sell it cheaper than we are selling it.

Now, I have to go to Amazon and say you can't sell the product for less than $9.99, which means a $1.99 increase over their previous price and that is simply so that I can sell through Apple and comply with their most favored nations clause.

This is the part that I think most people forget about and don't realize how much it really did increase the amount consumers are paying for eBooks.

Competition is good and drives prices down, most favored nations clauses are bad and drive prices up.

Most favoured nation clauses aren't illegal, so how have you explained to us why it's a crime?

If your customers can't get your product for a fair price they can just buy someone else's instead.


Yes, my fault, I didn't read the second one, thanks


The problem was not the MFN clause, the problem was forcing all the stores, including Google Play, B&N, Sony, Kobo, etc change to the agency model

No, that's not illegal either. It was the timing of all publishers switching at the same time which was deemed a conspiracy. Rating: 4 Votes Avatar Iconoclysm 6 days ago at 02:31 pm In a quick snapshot, here goes...

Amazon was selling ebooks, mostly for $9.99.

Jobs and Fast Eddie came up with a scheme to get into the ebook market for their new iPad, without having to compete with price (the last thing they wanted to do).
So they colluded with a bunch of publishers, who didn't like Amazon having so much control, to agree that the price would have to be set at $14.99, no sales, nothing.
If Amazon didn't like it, they couldn't sell the book at the price they wanted to.

And bad news for Apple, they caught Jobs on video admitting to it when asked about how to compete with Amazon, "it will cost the same".


Aha, so now I see that you don't really have that firm a grasp over what happened at all...why are you on this site? Rating: 4 Votes Avatar mw360 6 days ago at 02:43 pm Wow, editorialize much?

If only there were some way to distinguish quotes from the author's own words. Rating: 4 Votes Avatar mw360 6 days ago at 03:58 pm Perhaps he is not getting the original point, so here it is: The MR stated Apple's contention not as their argument to the court, but in a way that made it sound like it is already a fact.

I'm sorry, I've read it and reread it. The entire sentence is quite clear that it's a summary of Apple's request, and concludes with a direct quote.

The claim that Apple asked the court to overturn the ruling is a fact, the reason they gave is an opinion. The facts are written in the author's own words and the opinion is in quotes. The words thrown back at me are neither; they're just bits of a sentence that make no sense on their own. Rating: 4 Votes [ Read All Comments ] MacRumors


MacRumors attracts a broad audience of both consumers and professionals interested in the latest technologies and products. We also boast an active community focused onpurchasing decisions and technical aspects of the iPhone, iPod, iPad, and Mac platforms.

Advertise on MacRumors Our Staff Arnold Kim Editorial Director Email • Twitter Eric Slivka Editor in Chief Email • Twitter Jordan Golson Editor Email • Twitter Marianne Schultz Editor Email • Twitter Juli Clover Editor Email • Twitter • Google+ Husain Sumra Contributing Editor Email • Twitter Richard Padilla Contributing Editor Email • Twitter Kelly Hodgkins Contributing Editor Email • Twitter Links Touch Arcade The TouchArcade Show - 186 - Happy Whatever Doesn't Make You Mad!TouchArcade Game of the Week: 'Taekwondo Game Global Tournament'Best iPhone and iPad Games of the Week: 12/19/14 - 'Papers, Please' and 'Tales from the Borderlands'The Original 'Reckless Racing' Gets a Much Needed Modern UpdateGet The 'Skylanders Trap Team' Starter Pack for $19.99 Via AmazonShred On: 'True Skate' and 'Skater' Both Receive Content Updates AppShopper Apple Releases iOS 8.1 with Apple Pay, Photo Album, MoreMac OS X Yosemite Available Today, iOS 8.1 Coming October 20Apple Announces iPad Air 2 and iPad mini 3 with Touch IDApple Announces iPhone 6 Models and NFC-Based Electronic Payment SystemApple Watch Revealed with Early 2015 Release Timeframe and $349 Price TagApple to Release iOS 8 on September 17 Copyright © 2000-document.write(new Date().getFullYear()), LLC.
Privacy / DMCA contact / Affiliate and FTC Disclosure

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD $(function() { $('.search .icon').on('click', function() { $('.social').toggleClass('hide'); $('.primary > ul').toggleClass('hide remove'); $('.primary .search').toggleClass('show'); $('.search input').focus(); }); $('#header li#roundups a.parent').on('click', function(e) { e.preventDefault(); $('li#roundups ul#nav-dropdown').toggle(); if($('ul#nav-dropdown').is(':visible')) { $('li#roundups a.parent').addClass('active'); } else { $('li#roundups a.parent').removeClass('active'); } }); });

Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:

Δημοσίευση σχολίου