Quote:
Originally Posted by Kali Yuga
It's like the DoJ is saying "it was illegal for you to talk to one another, but what you were doing was legal, and we're going to stop you from doing it anyway."
|
It's not like that, it IS that.
The publishers (if guilty) went about it the wrong way. They went (allegedly) the illegal route. The DOJ have no way of knowing if non-collusion would have still enabled the publishers to reach an agency model. The publishers think it wouldn't as none of them were willing to move without the other. Why should they be rewarded for taking an illegal short-cut to getting to a new sales model. Whether it's for the good of the industry or not, those publishers if guilty should not be allowed to continue under the terms obtained through collusion.