View Single Post
Old 05-09-2015, 11:16 PM   #29
eschwartz
Ex-Helpdesk Junkie
eschwartz ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eschwartz ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eschwartz ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eschwartz ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eschwartz ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eschwartz ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eschwartz ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eschwartz ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eschwartz ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eschwartz ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.eschwartz ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
eschwartz's Avatar
 
Posts: 19,421
Karma: 85400180
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: The Beaten Path, USA, Roundworld, This Side of Infinity
Device: Kindle Touch fw5.3.7 (Wifi only)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwalker8 View Post
I'm having trouble understanding why you are struggling with the idea that individual publishers setting their own prices is not the same as price fixing. The individual publishers compete for a share of the other all book market. Penguin Books published Chernow's 2011 Biography of George Washington for $10.74 in the Kindle store. Simon & Schuster publishes McCullough's 2001 Biography of John Adams for $12.99 in the Kindle store. Two different publishers publish different books at different price points. Price fixing would require that the price points be the same. It's pretty straight forward.
It's pretty straightforward that they at one point conspired together to control the price floor. But I guess you are to busy trying to distract the issue.

(Aside -- biographies should all catch fire and die.)

Quote:
Settling without admitting guilt is actually quite important. Generally speaking, when one settles without admitting guilt, it's a strong indication that the prosecutor is more interested in collecting fines and counting coup than bringing the guilty to justice (or even caring if the accused is innocent or guilty). This is a major problem with the current legal system. Prosecutors can strong arm companies into paying fines without regard to guilt or innocence simply by stringing enough charges together that the company would be ruined if they went to trial and lost. Most trial lawyers would tell you that any time you go to trial, it's a gamble regardless of the facts. One never knows what a judge or jury is going to do.
Thank you for your pointless legalistic technicalities and can-bes. However, the case brought all kinds of interesting details to light and it is, after all, marginally possible that we the readers can read between the lines... and observe the known details, including the Apple conviction... and notice pricing trends all on our own... etc.
eschwartz is offline   Reply With Quote