Judge Rules Apple Colluded With Publishers to Fix Ebook Prices

Posted by Unknown on Wednesday July 10, 2013 @02:17AM from the captains-of-industry dept.

Despite many publishers themselves settling with the DOJ over allegations of price fixing ebooks, Apple held firm and recently went to trial. And now the verdict is in: Apple conspired with major publishers to control ebook prices in violation of anti-trust laws. A trial for damages has been ordered. Quoting Reuters: "The decision by U.S. District Judge Denise Cote in Manhattan is a victory for the U.S. government and various states, which the judge said are entitled to injunctive relief. ... Cote said the conspiracy resulted in prices for some e-books rising to $12.99 or $14.99, when Amazon had sold for $9.99. 'The plaintiffs have shown that the publisher defendants conspired with each other to eliminate retail price competition in order to raise e-book prices, and that Apple played a central role in facilitating and executing that conspiracy,' Cote said. 'Without Apple's orchestration of this conspiracy, it would not have succeeded as it did in the spring of 2010,' she added." Update: 07/10 16:36 GMT by U L : The ruling is now available (160 page PDF).

1 of 383 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Re:Why shouldn't they be free to decide their pric by brian0918 · 2013-07-10 02:57 · Score: -1, Redundant

You lost me at "artificially raise prices" - is there a correct price for ebooks, regardless of context? What is it? If there isn't one, then how can you determine that a given price is "artificially high"? Why are certain voluntary agreements between individuals valid, but others are considered "artificial"?

allows them to do whatever the hell they wish
Except force the customer to buy their product. If buyers don't want to pay those prices, they won't, and Apple will suffer the consequences. Price is what the buyer and seller freely agree upon. The price tag a seller puts on products is just the "ask price". It is not until a buyer comes along and "bids" to accept that "ask price" that the price is determined - but that price is only valid for that specific trade.

Collusion breaks the principle of a free market by removing competition.
So others are not free to start up competing services? Who is enforcing that?