DOJ publishes terms for settlement in Apple antitrust case

[Graham]

Originally Posted by elcreative

Still, it hardly matters as it's only Apple, just another nasty vicious little business of no importance to the US economy, may as well encourage them to move all of their business to one of the BRIC groups completely...

Wouldn't the main beneficiaries here of any business lost by Apple here be Amazon, Google and B&N, which are also US companies?

Graham

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by elcreative

Still, it hardly matters as it's only Apple, just another nasty vicious little business of no importance to the US economy, may as well encourage them to move all of their business to one of the BRIC groups completely...

How about one of these brick groups instead?

[pwalker8]

Yep. Some of these Apple bashers might want to consider that what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Both Amazon and Google are pretty easy targets if the government every decides to go after them.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

And Apple wants the feds to blow them a kiss and let them keep on pulling more of the same shennannigans:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-575...-books-battle/



And that's it.
No fines, no restitution, and they get to keep all the market share they garnered by breaking the law.

Because, Apple is so trustworthy that their promise not to collude a third time can be believed.

I hope they keep this up.
The judge is bound to be thrilled by the posturing and PR smoke-n-mirrors.

The judge showed that she bought into the government's rather novel legal theories before the trial even started, I doubt she'll be particularly open minded now. While perhaps the judges verdict matches your personal prejudices against Apple, we'll see how things stand after appeals.

I can remember the same game being played against Microsoft back in the browser wars of the 90's. Everyone assumed that Netscape won a huge victory over Microsoft when Mocrosoft eventually settled. Where is Netscape now? No one wins when companies use the government to bash their competitors.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

I can remember the same game being played against Microsoft back in the browser wars of the 90's. Everyone assumed that Netscape won a huge victory over Microsoft when Mocrosoft eventually settled. Where is Netscape now? No one wins when companies use the government to bash their competitors.

Netscape kind of is in the browsers that followed it. But IE is really not a browser people want to use. So, yes better technology won.

[Graham]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

The judge showed that she bought into the government's rather novel legal theories before the trial even started

Oh, for goodness sake, it's well-documented that both Apple and the DoJ requested the judge's pre-trial deliberation on the detailed slides of evidence presented for each side's case.

She was the judge, the whole trial was about her consideration of the evidence; at that point in the process she regarded the DoJ's case to be far stronger and said so in response to the request from Apple and the DoJ.

Graham

[kennyc]

Man, here we go....all the apologists at work. Just further proof of the Religion of Jobs.

[tubemonkey]

From the Mac Observer

The U.S. Department of Justice doesn't want much, just control over Apple's entire iTunes business. This, because Apple had the audacity to do something that same DOJ had failed to do, which was bring competition to the ebook market.

...shocking, just shocking

[AnemicOak]

Apple had the audacity to do something that same DOJ had failed to do, which was bring competition to the ebook market.

That should maybe read, to kill a lot of the competition. RIP, Fictionwise, Books on Board & CyberRead.

[tubemonkey]

...poor Apple and poor publishers

Publishers urge DOJ to rethink Apple e-book remedies

Five of the major book publishers are now urging the Department of Justice to rethink its demands on Apple to change the way it sells e-books.

Hachette, HarperCollins, Holtzbrinck (also known as Macmillan), Penguin, and Simon & Schuster filed an opposition to last week's proposed remedies against Apple by the Justice Department, arguing that the plan would "effectively eliminate the use of the agency model" for e-book distribution for the next five years.

[JoeD]

Isn't the elimination of agency for 5 years the entire point of what the DoJ are doing? They moved to agency illegally and as a punishment cannot move to it again for 5 years. After that time, I assume they can _individually_ choose to move to it again or not.

Regardless of all the other restrictions they wish to impose on Apple, the 5 year agency limit seems like one of the most important (only slightly ahead of the MFN limit though)

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

...poor Apple and poor publishers

Secret memo from Apple to its 5 ex-partners, dated Aug 7, 2013:

"Stop.Trying.To.Help.Us!!!!"

Do those folks even bother to think?
They just told the judge they intend to restore the exact same (uncompetitive) regime that the feds objected to, in two years.

More, legally speaking, since this is an antitrust case and all the publishers agreed to 5 years' monitoring, she *can* change the terms of the settlement unilaterally at any time within that window. Or even *extend* the monitoring.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Secret memo from Apple to its 5 ex-partners, dated Aug 7, 2013:

"Stop.Trying.To.Help.Us!!!!"

Do those folks even bother to think?
They just told the judge they intend to restore the exact same (uncompetitive) regime that the feds objected to, in two years.

No, they did not object to agency pricing. The objected to the co-operation when introducing it.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by tompe

No, they did not object to agency pricing. The objected to the co-operation when introducing it.

And the way they forced it upon retailers and even Random House.
One more time: the mechanism is not illegal as long as its not used to *prevent* competition.

They are not going to be allowed to wink-wink game the system. The monitoring they agreed to isn't toothless; there will be consequences if they keep trying to find loopholes. For example, the feds can drag them back to court for full trial. Or the judge might find them in contempt of court without trial.

[tubemonkey]

poor Apple - a victim of high margins