[fjtorres]

From Publishers Weekly:
http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/b...njunction.html

On the question of the DoJ’s proposed injunctive relief, Judge Cote deferred, and asked the parties to confer and see if they could come closer to agreement. But in a long preamble, she cited four lines of thinking, which included citing numerous cases that give the court wide latitude to fashion a strong injunction, as well as her own takeaways from the case—including her belief that the parties were “unrepentant” and that the publishers wanted higher e-book prices, and that they would likely to go back to price-fixing in the e-book market.

Cote said she was going to issue an injunction—but in a ray of hope for the defendants, she said she understood that the technology was moving fast and that no one could predict the future. As such, she said she did not want to fashion a lengthy injunction that could inhibit innovation. The judge also said she had no desire to regulate the App Store, but noted that Apple’s claim that the app store was not involved in Apple’s anticompetitive behavior was not true. She stressed the need to ensure that the app store could not be used as “an end run” around any injunction pertaining to the iBookstore.