Quote:
Originally Posted by AnemicOak
Publishers have indicated pretty much all along that they planned to go back to agency as soon as their settlements allowed. It's not an illegal model, it's the way that they went about implementing it that was the problem.
|
This pretty much shows what happens when a judge who knows nothing about business attempts to micromanage a business. There are all sorts of unexpected consequences for third parties.
I might be wrong, but I believe that Apple has kind of a hybrid agency model on the music side of the iTunes store. Publishers are free to sale music at several different price point as long as they don't sale it cheaper elsewhere. The don't sale cheaper clause of the contract is, of course, what makes the agency model work.
What the story doesn't say and a quick google search doesn't show is what this appeal is in respect to. Is this part of Apple's appeal? Is this their own appeal of Judge Cote's ruling? If so, are they appealing to the 2nd Appeals Court?