05-25-2012, 10:26 AM | #16 | |
Groupie
Posts: 182
Karma: 1316076
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Florida
Device: iPad
|
Quote:
|
|
05-25-2012, 10:45 AM | #17 |
Resident Curmudgeon
Posts: 74,257
Karma: 129333566
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Roslindale, Massachusetts
Device: Kobo Libra 2, Kobo Aura H2O, PRS-650, PRS-T1, nook STR, PW3
|
|
Advert | |
|
05-25-2012, 10:56 AM | #18 | |
Wizard
Posts: 2,016
Karma: 2838487
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Device: Ipad, IPhone
|
Quote:
Well, isn't that the dispute? Apple is arguing that : A. There was no conspiracy B. If there was a conspiracy, Apple wasn't in it. The answer makes several points. 1. The DOJ timeline doesn't work. According to the DOJ, Apple and the publishers began this conspiracy from early 2009, yet they can't point to any communication between Apple and the publishers before December 2009. 2.There are innocent explanations as to why Apple was in communication with the publishers after December 2009. 3.There is a good business explanation as to why the Apple'sagreements with the publishers are so similiar. 4.The reason for all the publishers agreeing before April 2010 was because Apple wanted such agreement in time for theiPad launch. 5. Steve Job's statements in his biography are inadmissible hearsay, or can be interpreted as non-conspiratorial Some of those arguments are better than others, of course, but Apple doesn't have the burden of proof. Apple argues that agency pricing led to a more diverse and competitive market. Eventually, duelling economists will answer that but its seems clear that there would have been fewer competitors in the market, absent agency pricing. THe DOJ strategy is to focus on price of bestsellers alone: Apple argues that there is more to a healthy ebook market than that. I think that eventually the Supreme Court will decide who is right under the law. |
|
05-25-2012, 11:04 AM | #19 |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 11,732
Karma: 128354696
Join Date: May 2009
Location: 26 kly from Sgr A*
Device: T100TA,PW2,PRS-T1,KT,FireHD 8.9,K2, PB360,BeBook One,Axim51v,TC1000
|
Apple's defense sounds a lot like their defense on their salary-fixing conspiracy.
http://www.macworld.com.au/news/appl...lawsuit-51566/ They certainly have a lot of experience litigating against conspiracy charges, that's for sure. (They ended settling with the feds last time around, though.) Last edited by fjtorres; 05-25-2012 at 11:07 AM. |
05-25-2012, 11:04 AM | #20 | |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 27,572
Karma: 193191846
Join Date: Jan 2010
Device: Nexus 7, Kindle Fire HD
|
Quote:
"Did the defendants break the law in how they breathed life into this agency model?" is the only question needing answered here. Not "would the agency model foster more competition?"... no matter how much the defendants want it to be about the latter. Mitigation is not justification. Last edited by DiapDealer; 05-25-2012 at 11:22 AM. |
|
Advert | |
|
05-25-2012, 11:34 AM | #21 | |
Wizard
Posts: 2,016
Karma: 2838487
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Device: Ipad, IPhone
|
Quote:
Its second line of defense is that what they did led to a more competive market. As you know, the ant-trust laws speak of "competition" and "restraint of trade" , not "low prices". |
|
05-25-2012, 11:46 AM | #22 | |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 27,572
Karma: 193191846
Join Date: Jan 2010
Device: Nexus 7, Kindle Fire HD
|
Quote:
That's not a second line of defense. That's not even relevant—even if it were provably true. Illegal collusion to fix prices is the charge. Any other factors being introduced to the discussion are strictly diversionary in nature. Last edited by DiapDealer; 05-25-2012 at 11:49 AM. |
|
05-25-2012, 11:59 AM | #23 |
Wizard
Posts: 4,896
Karma: 33602910
Join Date: Oct 2010
Device: PocketBook 903 & 360+
|
Of course. And forcing Amazon to make more money on sales obviously weakens it's position in the market.
|
05-25-2012, 12:02 PM | #24 | ||
Wizard
Posts: 2,016
Karma: 2838487
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Device: Ipad, IPhone
|
Quote:
Quote:
Based on that case, the Supreme Court is at least open to a "second line of defense" argument, contrary to popular belief. |
||
05-25-2012, 12:13 PM | #25 | |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 27,572
Karma: 193191846
Join Date: Jan 2010
Device: Nexus 7, Kindle Fire HD
|
Quote:
|
|
05-25-2012, 12:15 PM | #26 | |
Interested Bystander
Posts: 3,725
Karma: 19728152
Join Date: Jun 2008
Device: Note 4, Kobo One
|
Quote:
|
|
05-25-2012, 12:24 PM | #27 | ||||
Wizard
Posts: 4,896
Karma: 33602910
Join Date: Oct 2010
Device: PocketBook 903 & 360+
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Which is an argument for collusion, not against it. |
||||
05-25-2012, 12:24 PM | #28 |
Groupie
Posts: 182
Karma: 1316076
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Florida
Device: iPad
|
|
05-25-2012, 12:37 PM | #29 | |
Wizard
Posts: 2,016
Karma: 2838487
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Device: Ipad, IPhone
|
Quote:
"Yes, we colluded to fix prices BUT we did it for a good business reason, and we're asking you to make an exception to the general rule" That's how the defendant won in the Leegin case. Now will the Supreme Court buy this in a case where there is not one supplier, but a group of suppliers acting in concert? Dunno. Possible, though. |
|
05-25-2012, 12:51 PM | #30 | |
Wizard
Posts: 2,016
Karma: 2838487
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Device: Ipad, IPhone
|
Quote:
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Apple re-"invents" Xerox's "Location based services" | kartu | News | 9 | 11-20-2011 01:21 PM |
Free anthology: "Other Sides" | MeiLin | Self-Promotions by Authors and Publishers | 0 | 10-15-2010 12:57 AM |
Real competition with the jb/jbl... Augen's "The Book" | jblitereader | Ectaco jetBook | 6 | 06-10-2010 03:23 PM |
Let's have a "Pimp My MobileRead" competition | frabjous | Lounge | 55 | 11-25-2009 02:13 AM |