Judge Thinks Apple Will Lose E-Book Price-Fixing Case

Nerval's Lobster writes "Apple could face a difficult time winning its court case against the U.S. Department of Justice over e-book pricing, according to the federal judge overseeing the trial. 'I believe that the government will be able to show at trial direct evidence that Apple knowingly participated in and facilitated a conspiracy to raise prices of e-books,' U.S. District Judge Denise Cote said during a May 23 pretrial hearing, according to Reuters, 'and that the circumstantial evidence in this case, including the terms of the agreements, will confirm that.' Apple's legal counsel is a bit perturbed over her comments. 'We strongly disagree with the court's preliminary statements about the case today,' Apple lawyer Orin Snyder wrote in a statement also reprinted by Reuters. The Justice Department has asserted that Apple, along with those publishers, conspired to raise retail e-book prices in tandem 'and eliminate price competition, substantially increasing prices paid by consumers.' Apple battles Amazon in the e-book space, with the latter company achieving great success over the past few years by driving down the price of e-books and Kindle e-readers; while Apple co-founder insisted in emails to News Corp executive James Murdoch (son of Rupert Murdoch), that Amazon's pricing was ultimately unsustainable, the online retailer shows no signs of flagging with regard to its publishing-industry clout."

Comments

Re:That's what beancounters do in every company

[Black Parrot]

Jon Stewart had a comment along these lines back when the police raided someone's residence over the loose iPhone prototype (or whatever it was):

"What happened? Bill Gates is curing AIDS in Africa, and Steve Jobs is kicking down people's doors in Palo Alto!"

It used to be so simple to keep track of who was the good guys and who was the bad guys...

Re:judge in Apple's pocket?

[DragonWriter]

Can't prejudice such as this get Apple's case thrown out?

Prejudice is opinion formed independently and prior to evidence being presented. This is a comment about how things stand based on the evidence that has been presented, which is not, in any way, shape, or form, prejudice. Its just "judice", which, you know, is what judges do.

Re:Good

[Anonymous Coward]

I personally think a more fitting punishment would be to force these thieves to personally give free money to poor people.

Unfortunately, given the constitutional protection against "cruel and unusual punishment," your ten lashes are more likely.