View Single Post
Old 05-31-2012, 04:27 PM   #28
stonetools
Wizard
stonetools ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.stonetools ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.stonetools ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.stonetools ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.stonetools ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.stonetools ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.stonetools ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.stonetools ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.stonetools ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.stonetools ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.stonetools ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
stonetools's Avatar
 
Posts: 2,016
Karma: 2838487
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Device: Ipad, IPhone
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProfCrash View Post
Given that the court is addressing collusion and not how the market worked to drive prices of e-readers down I doubt that the price of e-readers will enter the picture. If the court is interested in that, they can take a basic economics class.

That has nothing to do with the case that argues that the Publishers and Apple colluded to set the price of e-books.
Well, the courts will certainly consider analysis by economists if that is submitted. Clearly, you buy the DOJ view that we should focus on whether there was any agreement to raise prices and nothing else. That's not the defense approach. The courts have certainly held in past that they can consider more than whether there was just an agreement to raise prices- which is why the defense is taking that approach.
I'll point out that the defense do insist, clearly and forcefully, that there was no collusion. That's theirmain defense.
stonetools is offline   Reply With Quote