DOJ suing Apple over ebooks.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by JonathanH

I love typographical arguments - it's like big-endian vs. little-endian all over again

I've reverted to em-dashes-without-spaces in the EPUB file. MOBI remains defiantly en-dashes-with-spaces.

The ePub looks pretty good in ADE 1.8.2.

[Graham]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

You had it almost correct. You just needed to use [] instead of <>.

Ah, many thanks.

Graham

[drofgnal]

So when does the DOJ make apple allow in app purchases for kindle
again?

[cfrizz]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

It's not a "maybe," it's a "definite." Apple + 5 publishers are getting sued.

http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.co...ok-pricing/?hp

Full text of the suit is attached, for the law geeks.

The DOJ is suing Apple, Hachette Book Group, HarperCollins, Macmillan, Penguin Group USA and Simon & Schuster over the adoption of agency pricing.

It looks like agency pricing itself is not the issue -- as indicated by Random House adopting agency pricing months after the other publishers.

My guess at this time is that if they don't settle, it'll take 2-3 years for the case to be finalized. Everyone will get a fine (i.e. big slap on the wrist), Apple's guarantee of "no one gets a lower price than us" will be tossed out, retailers will be allowed some latitude with discounts and... agency pricing will continue. I guess we'll see in 2-3 years.

The publishers cannot afford to have this drag on for 2-3 years, the negative publicity would kill them. I have no doubt this got started because we the people complained loud & long, and see these shysters fighting this suit would turn us away from them in droves. It's better to settle & still remain in business, rather than be blacklisted in the publics mind and end up out of business!

[Fbone]

Publishers can enter into one-year agency agreements that stipulate that the retailer can sell individual titles at a loss, but must show a profit overall for all the books it sells from that publisher’s catalog.

Interesting. How would a retailer implement this, if the publishers approves. For every book sold $5 below cost the retailer has to sell one $5.01 above cost or five books $1.01 above wholesale price or something in between. Sell too many at a loss (bestseller, perhaps?) and the retailer may not show a profit for the publisher's entire catalog.

[sabredog]

Be interesting to see what unfolds as the suit progresses.

At the very least, the speculation will diminish a tad.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by cfrizz

The publishers cannot afford to have this drag on for 2-3 years, the negative publicity would kill them.

Maybe you are right, but I don't understand why. Ten seconds after getting past the title page of a book, nine times out of ten, I couldn't tell you who the publisher was. And I don't think I'm unusual there.

Now, people do know, when they buy an Apple product, that it was from Apple. So I'd think that, if negative publicity from being accused of lawbreaking is going to hurt anyone, it would be Apple. I'm not saying that Apple will be hurt, only that it would be particualarly safe for the publishers to drag this out for many years.

I guess the test of your thesis will be how well the big company that wasn't sued, Random House, does compared to the rest.

Is there anyone here who plans to boycott those sued while still patronizing Random House?

P.S. Also, how is having the case go on for 2-3 years dragging it out? This would be rapid compared to the experience of IBM and Microsoft.

[stonetools]

And I'm back.

I finally got a chance to read and re-read the complaint. I must say, there is more evidence of collusion than I thought. Kudos, DOJ. They put in some hard work. That said, there are gaps.
A lot of the complaint reads like:

In September 2008, Penguin Group CEO John Makinson was joined by Macmillan CEO John Sargent and the CEOs of the other four large publishers at a dinner meeting in "The Chefs Wine Cellar," a private room at Picholene. One of the CEOs reported that business matters were discussed.

United States Department of Justice (2012-04-11T07:00:00+00:00). United States v. Apple, Inc. et al (Kindle Locations 176-178). Kindle Edition.

So businessmen discuss business matters at lunch? WOW.
There is a lot of talk about the "9.99" problem and talk of mounting a collective response, but actually the publishers don't do much (except windowing)till Apple shows up.
Now Apple does offer them agency and the DOJ does show that the publishers are happy to do agency agreements with Apple. But then they don't move in concert against Amazon, although according to the complaint, it would be impossible for any company to move against Amazon alone.
The complaint dances around this, but the fact is that only one company Macmillan, moves against Amazon. Only after Macmillan faces down Amazon do the others press for agency.
Again, maybe they'll fill in the gaps with discovery. If they don't , it will be a tough trial for the DOJ.

[ProfCrash]

I would bet money that they have executives from the three settled Publishers who will be able to testify regarding the specifics of what happened in those meetings and over those phone calls.

[sabredog]

Looks like everyone is getting on board now. Sixteen US states plus Puerto Rico have now files anti-trust suits against those publishers and Apple the DOJ have filed against.

http://www.teleread.com/paul-biba/st...cy-publishers/

[stonetools]

Originally Posted by Fbone

Interesting. How would a retailer implement this, if the publishers approves. For every book sold $5 below cost the retailer has to sell one $5.01 above cost or five books $1.01 above wholesale price or something in between. Sell too many at a loss (bestseller, perhaps?) and the retailer may not show a profit for the publisher's entire catalog.

At Publishers Lunch one analyst said:

n fact, Justice appears to have set up a system that will allow limited discounting of ebooks, so as to inhibit predatory loss-leader pricing of ebooks from the settling publishers. They acknowledge that settling publishers retain the ability "to prevent a retailer selling its entire catalogue at a sustained loss."

So retailers can elect to give away ALL of the commission they receive over the course of a year in reduced prices to consumers--but they are not allowed to lose money selling ebooks if the settling publishers chose to introduce new, revised agency models. (They can lose money on individual titles, but not across a company's entire list over the course of a year.)

LINK

Amazon can therefore discount SOME bestsellers. But $9.99 for all the bestsellers is out the window and using ebooks as a loss leader will be limited.

[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by cfrizz

The publishers cannot afford to have this drag on for 2-3 years, the negative publicity would kill them.

The publicity of what? Fine dining in NYC?

Prosecuting antitrust cases takes a long time, during which nothing public happens. Today is a big burst of publicity; tomorrow there will be a few more news reports; after that, it'll be lost in the haze of the 24/7 news cycle. There probably won't be more real discussion until the trial starts, which could easily be 12+ months from now.

Consider the Microsoft anti-trust case. Filed in 1998, judge ruled against MS in 2000, judge removed in 2001, settlement reached in 2002. This was despite lots of documentation about Microsoft's anticompetitive behavior and a thoroughly embarrassing video deposition by Bill Gates. MS only settled pretty much after they knew they lost, and on quite favorable terms.

Originally Posted by cfrizz

I have no doubt this got started because we the people complained loud & long....

Yes, I'm sure the DoJ patronize MobileRead.

[howyoudoin]

Originally Posted by sabredog

Looks like everyone is getting on board now. Sixteen US states plus Puerto Rico have now files anti-trust suits against those publishers and Apple the DOJ have filed against.

http://www.teleread.com/paul-biba/st...cy-publishers/

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by ProfCrash

I would bet money that they have executives from the three settled Publishers who will be able to testify regarding the specifics of what happened in those meetings and over those phone calls.

Let me know if you find anybody to bet against you.
I'd like to sell them some choice real estate 900 miles *east* of Daytona Beach.

[stonetools]

here is no reason why Fictionwise can't bring back their loyalty program.
Or why B&N can't create one.

Actually, there is a reason. They may not be able to afford it. (Discounts cost retailers money).
Long before agency, FW sold out to BN. The most likely reason was because they weren't making enough money to make a go of it on their own . I note that BN didn't adopt the FW loyalty program. Again, the most likely reason is that they couldn't afford it.