Quote:
Originally Posted by AnemicOak
An agency system in and of itself isn't the problem. It's already been ruled that such a system wouldn't be illegal. It's the collusion part that the trial is about.
|
Exactly.
The trial is about what was actually done, not what was discussed.
It should be noted that Random House was not charged even though they were a party to the collusion discussions.
They knew the others were colluding (and were even expected to join in, right up to iPad launch day) and at the last moment they decided (correctly) that joining in from day one would not be in their best interests.
They discussed an agency deal but did nothing illegal.
(And, as a matter of fact, by staying *out* of the conspiracy, they did gangbuster business for several months, which is why Apple and Penguin leaned on them to join the conspiracy..."or else".)
Similarly, whatever Amazon may or not have discussed in negotiations with the BPHs did not result in any action, did not result in any price hike, did not break antitrust.
"Deeds, not words."