Quote:
Originally Posted by Ninjalawyer
I asked for evidence, not speculation.
Perhaps the DOJ would have responded to a similar complaint made by Joe the Plumber, if that complain described a real, substantive issue. The fact that the DOJ acted on a complaint, and applied the legal analysis of the complainant (after conducting its own analysis) isn't evidence of crony capitalism, just evidence that Amazon's complaint highlighted a substantive breach of the law and their lawyers did a good job in describe the current state of the law.
Evidently there must have been some merit in Amazon's complaint, since a judge agreed that illegal collusion on he part of the publishers had occurred. Or was the judge also doing favours for Amazon?
From this thread, I think we've all learned that "crony capitalism", means someone you don't like getting a favourable result at court, regardless of the facts or merits of the case.
|
No, from this thread we learn that crony capitalism is whenever someone gets a favor from the government, regardless of how you feel about them personally. Back during the browser wars, I used Netscape over I.E., yet I acknowledge that Netscape got favorable treatment from the US government based on donations and personal contacts. That makes it crony capitalism, regardless of if I think that Netscape was a superior browser.
I point out that Amazon didn't "make a complanant" but rather wrote a white paper which presented a rather novel legal theory that spun the idea on what constituted anti-trust on it's head. The US government then used that white paper as the basis of their complaint against the five publishers and Apple.