Quote:
Originally Posted by darryl
Judges are rarely experts in the industry of litigants. However, Judges findings are based on the evidence. And, where Judges at first instance do get it wrong, other Judges get the chance to correct this on appeal, usually multiple levels of appeal. With the benefit of lawyers arguing why the initial judge got it wrong. Apple did of course appeal and lost, and the Supreme Court refused to hear a further appeal. The facts involved were contained in the evidence before her. Her "opinion" or "findings" are based on the evidence. If only we could say the same of your opinion expressed here.
Amazon did later accept agency agreements when the settlement agreements expired and Publishers again sought them. To see why you only have to look at what has happened. The phrase "hoist by ones own petard" comes to mind.
As for people's willingness to pay these inflated prices? The fact that sales of Big 5 ebooks are stagnant whilst sales elsewhere continue to grow suggests otherwise. My poll on this site, whilst imperfect, suggests about 30% will either pay the high prices set or buy the paperbook. Of the other 70% an unknown portion would consider buying the book later at a better price if it becomes available. That poll is here
As I said, the Poll was not perfect. But it gives some general idea, and there seems to be nothing similar publicly available. |
In the US, Appellate Courts defer to the trial courts on points of fact, they very rarely will correct facts on appeal. Appeals typically are on specific points of law. It is not uncommon for an Appellate Judge to suggest if an appeal had been made on a different point of law, it might have been successful. The narrow focus of appeals seems to be one of the major differences in US law and the rest of the world.
You do understand that a large part of the reason that the US Supreme Court declined to hear the case was because Scalia had died and they were in a 4-4 ideological dead lock. They declined a lot of cases during that time period for reasons that had nothing to do with the merits of the case.
You are comparing apples and oranges. Of course, no one actually has the figures, but a more valid comparison would be percentage of sales for a given book. Book sales are much like movie sales in that the overall sales figures tend to be driven by block busters. We haven't had a true block buster novel in a few years. Arguably the last big block buster was Fifty Shades of Grey which had a somewhat skews sales figures in favor of digital sales (29 M in print and 15 M digital in 2012 according to some estimates).