Judge denies Apple request to remove e-books antitrust monitor

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 48
    Thanks, AI, for not reusing that overused photo of Ben Bernanke with this article. ;)
  • Reply 22 of 48
    k2kwk2kw Posts: 2,075member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jungmark View Post



    In the mean time, Amazon is back to 90% market share. Yay, govt enabled monopoly. image

    Apple got off easy.   The judge should have kicked them out of the eBook market for a few years.

  • Reply 23 of 48
    foadfoad Posts: 717member

    This case is just bizarre. The judge is really pushing it. I wonder when the case will be presented before a different judge? The appeal?

     

    Also came across this article last night.

     

    http://www.salon.com/2014/01/12/amazons_bogus_anti_apple_crusade/

     

    It seriously is just bananas. The person from the DOJ that pushed the case forward now works at a law firm that considers Amazon one of their clients. The judge hires a friend of hers to monitor Apple months before new policies were to be in effect and wanted to have ex parte meetings with said friend. The monitor double dipping while not having the required experience. I just can't wrap my head around the stupidity involved with this case.

  • Reply 24 of 48
    adamcadamc Posts: 583member
    Recommended by Bryan Chaffin of Mac Observer

    http://www.salon.com/2014/01/12/amazons_bogus_anti_apple_crusade/
  • Reply 25 of 48
    The only surprise here is... No surprise at all. The money trails for the DOJ lawyers, Cote and Bromwich are already being seen. They and Amazon are striving to be the winners.
  • Reply 26 of 48
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,217member
    The lawyers knew this would be the result. Just like Cote has refused all appeals etc.

    But it's the rules of the game. Now they can go up the ladder without higher authorities auto kicking it because they didn't properly appeal to the original court
  • Reply 27 of 48
    k2kw wrote: »
    Apple got off easy.   The judge should have kicked them out of the eBook market for a few years.

    Clearly, the solution to a lack of competition in ebooks is to ban competition.
  • Reply 28 of 48
    k2kwk2kw Posts: 2,075member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post





    Clearly, the solution to a lack of competition in ebooks is to ban competition.

    Then Apple shouldn't have colluded with publishers.   I'll take Amazon with their cheaper books.

  • Reply 29 of 48
    foadfoad Posts: 717member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by K2kW View Post

     

    Then Apple shouldn't have colluded with publishers.   I'll take Amazon with their cheaper books.


     

    I don't know if you're trolling but try reading this article.

     

    http://www.salon.com/2014/01/12/amazons_bogus_anti_apple_crusade/

     

    Apple didn't care about the pricing as long as it was a level playing field. Amazon doesn't play on level playing field.

  • Reply 30 of 48
    k2kw wrote: »
    Then Apple shouldn't have colluded with publishers.   I'll take Amazon with their cheaper books.

    Of course you would. Only Apple deserves competition, but not Amazon and not Google. That's the tech troll meme.
  • Reply 31 of 48
    kpom wrote: »
    Not unexpected given the judge's previous comments about Apple during the case. My guess is that the brief was written primarily for the appellate court.

    Wanted to thumbs up you, but 'I'm over my limit for rating content. Please try again later.'
  • Reply 32 of 48
    foad wrote: »
    I don't know if you're trolling but try reading this article.

    http://www.salon.com/2014/01/12/amazons_bogus_anti_apple_crusade/

    Apple didn't care about the pricing as long as it was a level playing field. Amazon doesn't play on level playing field.
    Simple, buy from Amazon and make them bk
  • Reply 33 of 48
    Originally Posted by K2kW View Post

    Apple got off easy.   The judge should have kicked them out of the eBook market for a few years.

     

    Well, you don’t understand what’s going on. 

     

    Originally Posted by K2kW View Post

    Then Apple shouldn't have colluded with publishers.   I'll take Amazon with their cheaper books.

     

    Maybe don’t spew lies if you want to be listened to?

  • Reply 34 of 48
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by K2kW View Post

     

    Then Apple shouldn't have colluded with publishers.   I'll take Amazon with their cheaper books.


     

    You object to the claimed "colluding" that would ensure that the pricing from Apple was less than or equal to the pricing from Amazon while still allowing Apple (and Amazon) to make a comfortable profit margin?

     

    Let's see, as of today (January 14, 2014), a selection of eBook prices from the Apple iBooks store and Amazon Kindle store. There some current NYT best sellers, some random books that just showed up on one place or another (and I could find on both), and some old (and some very old) titles I'm personally familiar with.

     

    So ... Really? Going with Amazon on the basis of price?

     

    Yes, I'm so relieved that poor little Amazon's [effective] monopoly was subsidized by the US taxpayer (thank you DoJ). That Amazon pricing looks so much better than iBooks pricing. :no:

    /s

     

    NY Times Best Sellers







































    The Goldfinch 10.99 14.04
    Sycamore Row 9.99 13.75
    Hazardous Duty 12.99 17.22
    The First Phone Call From Heaven 8.99 16.77
    Command Authority 5.99 17.22
    Doctor Sleep 14.99 19.38
    Cross My Heart 7.99 14.04

     

    On average, these iBooks are 36% less expensive than the Kindle counterparts.

     

    Random Selection (no criteria)





























    Fear Nothing 12.99 17.22
    Switchblade 0.99 0.93
    First Love 12.99 12.16
    Lone Survivor 5.99 7.48
    King and Maxwell 8.99 14.04

     

    iBooks is again cheaper by an average of 19% here.

     

    Older Books (years to decades since first publication)







































    Krondor the Betrayal 6.99 8.38
    The Sword of Shannara 7.99 9.52
    Star Soldiers 0.00 0.00
    Wizard’s Worlds 3.99 0.96
    Moonsinger 6.99 5.65
    Fire Sea 7.99 9.51
    Serpent Mage 7.99 9.51

     

    Go figure, even with a fire sale from Amazon on a collection of short stories first published about 25 years ago, iBooks still comes out less expensive on average.

  • Reply 35 of 48
    mknoppmknopp Posts: 257member
    Wow, shocker, the judge that put the guy in place to begin with upheld her own decision. Who didn't see that one coming?

    Our justice system is a sad joke.
  • Reply 36 of 48
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by K2kW View Post

     

    Then Apple shouldn't have colluded with publishers.   I'll take Amazon with their cheaper books.


     

    Really?

     

    eBooks cost less once Apple entered the market and made it more competitive, don't you mean Amazon's more expensive books?

     

    Quote:

    Every year, the “Library & Book Trade Almanac,” an authority in the field, reports annual sales by book category. It 2008, when Amazon had a lock on the market, it reported that the average price of an adult fiction e-book in the U.S. in was $8.71. In 2009, as more people self-published books, the average dropped to $8.21. In 2010, when Apple introduced its agency model for e-books, the price dropped 14 percent to $7.06. And when publishers were up and running against Amazon in 2011, the average price of an e-book sank by an astonishing 32 percent — to $4.83. “That’s a steal,” said Al Greco, a professor of marketing at Fordham University. 


     

    Source.

     

    This kangaroo court is as bogus as your posts.

  • Reply 37 of 48
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 5,043member

    What will probably happen is apple will need to assign their own lawyer to follow this guy around and when he talks to people they will have to advise them on how to answer the questions. From the sounds of it this guys is out fishing and looking for other things and he is probably very good at asking questions which do not have a good answer no matter how you answers, they are design to incriminate you and the company.

  • Reply 38 of 48
    cjaercjaer Posts: 14member

    Jury ? jurist

  • Reply 39 of 48
    So, if any business model where the seller earns a % of the retail price is considered price fixing, there are a lot of guilty parties out there. Pretty much anyone who earns commission.
  • Reply 40 of 48
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,109member
    stourque wrote: »
    So, if any business model where the seller earns a % of the retail price is considered price fixing, there are a lot of guilty parties out there. Pretty much anyone who earns commission.

    You're not even close to what this was about. Earning a percentage of sales is perfectly acceptable and has been.
Sign In or Register to comment.