Quote:
Originally Posted by fjtorres
Actually, the market share number is irrelevant.
Even an outright 100% share monopoly is not by itself illegal. They would have to *also* do something that abuses their market power to hurt *consumers*. Like raise prices outrageously or force consumers to buy audiobooks to get the ebook.
|
From the lawsuit:
Quote:
|
In addition, consumers have been injured because they have been deprived of choice and also denied the benefits of innovation and competition from the foreclosure of independent brick-and-mortar bookstores
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by fjtorres
The fact of the matter is DRM is an optional feature of Kindle readers and Amazon neither demands it nor forbids it. As of today there is no law forbidding DRM or mandating support for any specific brand of DRM or file format. Amazon has the right to design their readers as they please just as Sony and Nintendo can design their gaming devices as they please.
|
The lawsuit doesn't say that Amazon demands DRM. It is saying that there are agreements between Amazon and the Big 6 that violate the Sherman Antitrust Act.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fjtorres
The courts have already made it clear that "blame Amazon" doesn't play in antitrust court so its just delusional to hope it'll fly this time because "it's unfair!".  |
Amazon was
sued for antitrust violations by POD publishers and it ended with a settlement.
Quote:
|
We didn't do this for the money. We did it to make Amazon understand that covert efforts aimed at forcing POD publishers to pay Amazon / BookSurge (now Createspace) to print their books is not the way responsible corporate citizens should act. By getting Amazon to rescind their pay-us-to-print-your-books-or-else policy, we believe BookLocker's lawsuit achieved its goal.
|