Slashdot Mirror
Supreme Court Rejects Apple eBooks Price-Fixing Appeal (reuters.com)
chasm22 writes: The Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear Apple Inc's challenge to an appellate court decision that it conspired with five publishers to increase e-book prices, meaning it will have to pay $450 million as part of a settlement. The court's decision not to hear the case leaves in place a June 2015 ruling by the New York-based 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that found Apple liable for engaging in a conspiracy that violated federal antitrust laws. Apple, in asking the high court to hear the case, said the June appeals court decision that the company had conspired with the publishers contradicted Supreme Court precedent and would "chill innovation and risk-taking." The 2nd Circuit's ruling followed a 2013 decision by U.S. District Judge Denise Cote that Apple played a "central role" in a conspiracy with publishers to raise e-book prices. The Justice Department said the scheme caused some e-book prices to rise to $12.99 or $14.99 from the $9.99 price previously charged by market leader Amazon.com Inc. "Apple liability for knowingly conspiring with book publishers to raise the prices of e-books is settled once and for all," said Bill Baer, head of the U.S. Justice Department's antitrust division.
Perhaps Congress should change the price fixing laws... What about Amazon? Just trying to anticipate the response from Apple.
Perhaps Congress should change the price fixing laws... What about Amazon? Just trying to anticipate the response from Apple.
It is pretty typical to have a MFN clause for things you BUY. This tends to lower prices. Apple arranged for MFN on things it and its competitors SOLD. This raises prices because it is IMPOSSIBLE, not merely painful, for anyone to compete on price.
A couple of things...
I do not moderate -- ever. Even though I can, I do not. I have my reasons.
Moderators can moderate however they see fit. You do not get to tell them how to spend their points.
Get an account if you don't want to be rate-limited.
While they both are about Apple, your comment is off-topic, at best. Trolling at worst. You were +1 at the time, that's overrated.
I do notice a trend. You seem to think others are obligated to behave in a manner that suits you - without regards for others feel on the subject. You seem to think you've got both power and insight. You seem to have an ego larger than its worth. You don't get to decide how someone moderates your post. You don't get to pick how often you're allowed to post. You don't get to change the subject to what you want to discuss as opposed to the topic.
In short, you're basically saying, "Don't tell me what to do." While, at the same time, saying, "Do what I say." Whatever makes you think you're entitled to be given consideration? I can assure you, you're not special nor are you in charge. You're a guest on someone else's hardware, act like it.
Well, act like it if you want to be heard. Just get a damned account if you want your posts seen.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
What KGIII said +plus+ don't take it so personally. Especially since you post as a very impersonal Anonymous Coward. Besides, it could be that someone was trying to up-mod you and just down-moded you by accident; it is easy to do given the way the mod selections are arranged in the mod dropdown: underrated is right below overratted, for example. I think they should be rearranged so that all the up mods are at the bottom [or top] and all the down mods are at the top [or bottom]. And once done it can't be easily corrected. When I err that way I usually just say, 'fuck em'.