DOJ claims Apple's changes to in-app purchase rules were aimed at Amazon

1356789

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 161

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ealvarez View Post


    Apple raised the prices



     


     


    Ignorant mob mentality in full effect there...


     


    Apple never raised prices.


     


    They sold books using a model that required book publishers to PLAY FAIR. that's it.


     


    It protected Apple from having to sell books at high prices if Amazon colluded with a publisher to sell lower on Amazon.  And it also allowed others to be protected if those books were sold lower on Apple's platform. If that happened, then it would require the publisher to allow that lower price to be available on apple's platforms too. It did not even ask to have sales that others weren't privy to.  but that's what Amazon was doing! And the stupid DOJ wants to go back to that UNFAIR model.  Not only that, but they want to artificially cripple Apple's ability to sell books at competitive pricing as well as get into apple's music business making them unfairly uncompetitive their as well.


     


    Nothing anticompetitive about it.  Steve said "if you let Amazon sell your book cheaper, then we get to sell it cheaper too."


     


    Makes sense now, doesn't it?


     


    That's all it was. 


     


    In all, it was the best thing anyone could ask for.  All it did was provide industry fairness.


     


    Took the buddy-buddy system out like yesterday's trash.


     


    Again... the DOJ is looking like a protector of Amazon's interests, which are anticompetitive and a throwback to unfair practices.


     


    Apple did something great here.  Might as well go with it.  Heck, it should be the only business model allowed. The publishers win, the retailers and distributors win, and the consumer wins.

  • Reply 42 of 161
    rob53rob53 Posts: 3,086member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Rob Bonner View Post


    Since when it is not legal to try to slow down a competitor?  



    I agree. Apple can change the way they operate their App Store because it's there's. It's not Amazon's or the DOJ. Companies do this all the time. Apple doesn't have to be fair with any other vendor. Apple is providing the App Store for use by Apple customers, not for Amazon or any Android customer to sell their products. Since when does a company have to sell a competitors product on its own system? The DOJ needs to go back to business school and understand how businesses work.

  • Reply 43 of 161

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by nikilok View Post


     


    The publishers can make up for that , by demanding there requirements to companies digitally distributing books.. Like Apple and Amazon right ?


     


    Ah I see the picture now.. Why would Publishers have to be middle men, between the author and the digital book store.


    The Author can go directly to Apple , like App developers publish apps to the app store.


     


    If that happened, the Publishers go out business. Great so why not adopt that model, authors publish there books themselves on digital stores without the need for a publisher :)



     


     


    Great post.  It is not the job of the government to keep making publishers money.  As it is, the author doesn't get paid nearly enough for THEIR own work.


     


    This is called Free Enterprise. Capitalism.


     


    The market determines what it will support.


     


    If there is a way for authors to cut out the middle man, then they should be able to do so.  No questions asked.

  • Reply 44 of 161
    drblankdrblank Posts: 3,383member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ealvarez View Post


    Apple raised the prices



    Apple was just using the retail list prices given by the Book publishers.  I think what people don't understand is that Amazon marks up from the cost to them by x%.


     


    Apple sells at the list price that companies give to people and they retain 30% because they have a lot of costs associated with that like Akamai content delivery, which Apple gives Akamai a percentage of that 30% of margin.


     


    Yes, ultimately the prices went up, but these book publishers didn't have a set retail list price established, which is where they screwed up in the beginning.   Look at what happened with MP3s, Apple originally started selling them for $.99, now MP3s are now more like $1.29m right?


     


    So what Amazon did was they just marked it up a certain percentage from cost, since the Book Publishers didn't have a list price model established..


     


    Now, whatever one wants to sell it at is up to the reseller, but Apple thought it should be a FAIR system setup initially.


     


    What happens when you walk into a store and by something?


     


    I think most people don't comprehend what they were trying to do.  

  • Reply 45 of 161

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by rob53 View Post


    I agree. Apple can change the way they operate their App Store because it's there's. It's not Amazon's or the DOJ. Companies do this all the time. Apple doesn't have to be fair with any other vendor. Apple is providing the App Store for use by Apple customers, not for Amazon or any Android customer to sell their products. Since when does a company have to sell a competitors product on its own system? The DOJ needs to go back to business school and understand how businesses work.



     


     


    Not to mention they should be grateful Apple has the Kindle App on the iOS devices.


     


    I don't see music and movies sold through itunes on the Kindle...


     


    Maybe the DOJ needs to look into THAT instead...

  • Reply 46 of 161
    drblankdrblank Posts: 3,383member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by nikilok View Post


     


    The publishers can make up for that , by demanding there requirements to companies digitally distributing books.. Like Apple and Amazon right ?


     


    Ah I see the picture now.. Why would Publishers have to be middle men, between the author and the digital book store.


    The Author can go directly to Apple , like App developers publish apps to the app store.


     


    If that happened, the Publishers go out business. Great so why not adopt that model, authors publish there books themselves on digital stores without the need for a publisher :)



    Yes, an Author can go directly, but what a book publisher does is they can front the author money while they are working on the book and when it comes out, they can promote the heck out of it with marketing money.  An author by themselves may not get much attention because they might not have a lot of marketing money behind them so unless you are RIPPING famous and already have your own marketing, etc.  no one will know you exist.


     


    That's why authors, artists go through record labels or book publishers.   For an author to become a best seller, you STILL have to get physical books in BN, and Borders, etc.  Just like bands still have to go on tours to promote their album, just like they still have to get physical copies out in various retail stores.

  • Reply 47 of 161


    the sad part about the JOJ looking into that email is that they miss the point entirely.


     


    Steve wasn't even talking about crippling amazon.


     


     


     


    Phil sent an email expressing alarm about Amazon's commerical which showed the ease of which an amazon customer could ditch iOS for Android.


     


    Steve then brilliantly and fairly said, then let's make sure the customers see the difference of why they should stick with iOS - our superior payment system.


     


    It was all about showcasing the Apple device superiority to Android, etc.  Not a jab at Amazon. 


     


    Apple customers would enjoy the convenience and security of apple's system more - therefore more likely to use iOS as their Kindle platform.


     


    In other words, Kindle App customers would prefer to use Kindle on iPhone as opposed to Android because the payment system is better.


     


    He was promoting the "Apple difference," something that all companies strive to do.


     


    That's all that's there. 

  • Reply 48 of 161

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by chabig View Post


    "five years might not be enough time to restore competition to the e-books market..."


     


    Because hamstringing Apple "restores" competition. What dream world is the DOJ living in?



     


    As if allowing competition on price is the only way to restore competition... but I honestly can't figure out what retailers can possibly compete on price while Amazon is in the market.  In fact, allowing pricing competition specifically breaks competition because Amazon has significantly more volume than anyone else.


     


    Regardless, the DOJ's entire argument is bunk because they assume that 100% of the competition in the eBook market is derived from price points.  This used to be true when a printed book was a printed book and everyone was selling the same exact copy, but now we have platforms that differentiate a given product between retailers.  People should be able to use their software of choice without being financially penalized.  To compete on price in the eBook market is abusive to the consumer.


     


    In my opinion, fixing the price on eBooks for all retailers is a good thing because it will drive hardware and software innovation... which is where the competition should be happening.

  • Reply 49 of 161


    Ebook price drops based on "volume" are a joke.


     


    In printing, it makes sense.  there is paper, ink, manpower, etc. involved.


     


    In Ebooks, it is the eBook creation one time.  then uploaded to servers. that's it.


     


    Then downloading which costs next to nothing per ebook after amortizing server cost with everything else those servers are doing.


     


    Amazon is the one with the unfair practices.


     


    All Apple's pricing model did was to make sure that if a publisher sells cheap on Amazon, then they have to sell cheap on Apple too.


     


    And that's as fair as it gets.

  • Reply 50 of 161
    nikiloknikilok Posts: 383member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by drblank View Post


    Yes, an Author can go directly, but what a book publisher does is they can front the author money while they are working on the book and when it comes out, they can promote the heck out of it with marketing money.  An author by themselves may not get much attention because they might not have a lot of marketing money behind them so unless you are RIPPING famous and already have your own marketing, etc.  no one will know you exist.


     


    That's why authors, artists go through record labels or book publishers.   For an author to become a best seller, you STILL have to get physical books in BN, and Borders, etc.  Just like bands still have to go on tours to promote their album, just like they still have to get physical copies out in various retail stores.



     


    Have you noticed the model with Apps sold on App Store ? Apple Publicizes those awesome apps, likewise Apple could publicize the top selling books.


    Granted its a lot harder than judging an app, compared to reading the entire book to rate it :P


     


    I think digital book stores could take up the role of what Publishers did in the past.


    And about fronting the author with money while writing books, come on i think authors can fund themselves.. not like the upfront costs of creating a book is high unlike App / Game development.

  • Reply 51 of 161

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by politicalslug View Post



    Am I the only person here who realizes that Amazon's old pricing model single handedly destroyed the market for big box bookstores in the US? If anything Apple's pricing would have saved that entire industry by setting ebook pricing more in line with their physical counterparts. Amazon's old strategy has worked to destroy something that I believe was essential to our culture. People don't go to bookstores anymore. Amazon put them all out of business. Only now the DOJ steps in. This is so very wrong. Where we're they then? Amazon's whole strategy has always been to destroy the competition by underpricing them to the point of being uncompetitive. This isn't how I want my tax money spent. I like physical books and physical book stores. What is the DOJ doing about that? I want to see the government forcing booksellers to sell ebook sat the same price as physical books and not a dime less. That is the only way we can get our book stores back. Who's with me?


    Sell both at the same price! Some use ebooks only for convenience, not price. I sell real books in my niche. There re some ebooks but they are terrible AND they cost almost as much as the regular product. What is DOJ doing about that? Holder and Co. have their fingers in so many pieces now they can't possibly know what they are doing. I hope that Apple can take this to the supreme court where the people there seem to be of a "little' higher calibre. This whole thing "smells" bad. Holder is TRYING to prove that Obama got what he wanted, someone to go after the bad guys! In this case he seems to have no rein on his own people, trying to make up for his genius fiasco in guns across the border.

  • Reply 52 of 161
    The best thing about this is the DOJ's noteworthy attempts to protect amazon's ebook monopoly.
  • Reply 53 of 161


    I don't think Apple did anything truly illegal. But I do think that Apple, particularly Jobs, did not appreciate how speculative, reflexive, emotive emails could come back to haunt. 

  • Reply 54 of 161
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,526member
    dontuwish wrote: »
    Payback for not entering into agreement and complying with NSA/FBI data requests.....

    This is the point. The DOJ is being used by supragovernmental forces that have nothing to do with the visible elected or appointed leaders. Amazon is getting payback for sharing search histories, Apple is feeling the prybar at its door. Blaming the president or the secretary is naive. Enough said.

    Edit: Just kidding! Ha, ha . . .
  • Reply 55 of 161
    So let me get this straight. The DOJ wants to perpetuate the Amazon model where businesses are forced to sell books below cost and lose tons of money and the only player able to do that sustainably is Amazon?!! The last man standing wins I guess. Looks like government is once again meddling in capitalism when it shouldn't. Regulating based on misguided ideas. Not only do these DOJ guys obviously know nothing about business, but they will perpetuate a legal monopoly called Amazon. Where do these guys think Apple will get the revenue to pay for maintaining the App Store, payment system, and vast server farms needed to support it all if they don't charge the companies who post their apps on the App Store? Amazon would basically be getting free advertising on the App Store and reaping all the purchases on their web site if the DOJ has their way. It's as if the DOJ were in Amazon's pocket, which I wouldn't be surprise to hear. I think it was Amazon who brought a complaint to the DOJ in the first place.
  • Reply 56 of 161

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post





    This is the point. The DOJ is being used by supragovernmental forces that have nothing to do with the visible elected or appointed leaders. Amazon is getting payback for sharing search histories, Apple is feeling the prybar at its door. Blaming the president or the secretary is naive. Enough said.



    Edit: Just kidding! Ha, ha . . .


     


    Really?

  • Reply 57 of 161
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,217member
    The DOJ seems to have missed the point that Apple didn't end up doing that kind of forcing at all.

    Apple could have said our way or you are banned from our devices, period. Kill filed the Amazon app etc

    They didn't.
  • Reply 58 of 161
    drblankdrblank Posts: 3,383member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by 9secondko View Post


     


     


    Not to mention they should be grateful Apple has the Kindle App on the iOS devices.


     


    I don't see music and movies sold through itunes on the Kindle...


     


    Maybe the DOJ needs to look into THAT instead...



    Apple can release an app for whatever platform they want to support.  They have the iTunes for Windows, OS X, and iOS, as that is what they want to support.  It works through an app.  What, you have to force people to write apps for every platform on the market?

  • Reply 59 of 161
    iaeeniaeen Posts: 588member
    nikilok wrote: »
    The publishers can make up for that , by demanding there requirements to companies digitally distributing books.. Like Apple and Amazon right ?

    Ah I see the picture now.. Why would Publishers have to be middle men, between the author and the digital book store.
    The Author can go directly to Apple , like App developers publish apps to the app store.

    If that happened, the Publishers go out business. Great so why not adopt that model, authors publish there books themselves on digital stores without the need for a publisher :)

    9secondko wrote: »

    Great post.  It is not the job of the government to keep making publishers money.  As it is, the author doesn't get paid nearly enough for THEIR own work.

    This is called Free Enterprise. Capitalism.

    The market determines what it will support.

    If there is a way for authors to cut out the middle man, then they should be able to do so.  No questions asked.

    So who does the editing? How about the typesetting? Who goes around to all the vendors and makes sure they all are going to carry the authors book? Who provides monetary support for the author before he is finished writing his book and foots the bill on the upfront cost to get the book into the store?

    If the author is overworked and underpaid in the current system, how do you expect him to function with his support stripped away?
  • Reply 60 of 161
    Why is the DOJ concerned only about Amazon?!! It's just one company doing business in books, among other things. They're starting to sound like they're in bed with Amazon. The DOJ is Amazon's gimp. Lol. Looks like they want only Amazon to survive in the end, because they'll just drive everyone else out of business. Then where's your "antitrust" ideals go from there? They want to stamp out competition, not promote it.
Sign In or Register to comment.