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."
Such rulings often determine things such as will bail be required, or in corporate cases, whether or not preliminary injunctions are appropriate.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
Yes, that is one of the purposes of a pretrial hearing. The judge has to determine whether or not the case should proceed to a trial or be dismissed. In order for there to be a trial, the Judge has to determine if the party bringing the lawsuit (the federal government in this case) has enough evidence to warrant a trial. The Judge also has to make a preliminary judgement about how likely the party bringing the lawsuit will win. This is needed in order to determine whether any preliminary injunctions should be issued prior to the trial (i.e. an injunction that takes place and stays in force until the trial is completed or another hearing reverses the injunction).
Probably because from Apple's perspective, all Apple did was let the publishers set their own book prices.
If you go open a physical book and look at the inside cover you will see something like the following: MSRP $19.99
MSRP stands for Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price. It is a suggested price. The seller can sell below this. (stores will slap a 30% off sticker on the book) Legally, suggesting a price is different than enforcing a price with a contract. They don't set prices on physical books because there is case law saying that is illegal. Basically this issue has already been through the courts.
Probably because from Apple's perspective, all Apple did was let the publishers set their own book prices.
Wrong. Part of the agreement with Apple was that the publishers would also not sell anywhere else for less than they do in Apples market.
"His name was James Damore."
Capitalism is about profit. Specifically, maximizing it.
That is a nice Straw man you got there. Setting your prices as high as possible is not the same as setting your prices to maximize profit. Lowering prices can lead to more sales resulting in more profit. Free Market Capitalism is about letting supply and demand dictate where the price will be. Apple has attempted to abuse contract law to have the government enforce a price control. Anti Trust laws are about enforcing Free Market Capitalism. They are there prevent control of supply and to prevent price manipulation. What Apple is pushing is Crony Capitalism.
Yes what they did is significantly different from the common 'most favored' clause: The Apple agreement allowed the publisher to set the RETAIL price to $X of which 30% would go to the retailer (apple, amazon etc).Usually the 'most favored clause' will set the buy price for the retailer/distributor, after which time they can sell it at any profit margin they wish.
The Apple/Publisher collusion specifically prevented anyone to undercut the itunes store on ebooks, preventing the retailer from using certain books as loss leaders or similar.