Apple's feud with antitrust monitor continues; company accused of not cooperating in iBooks oversigh

Posted:
in General Discussion edited April 2015
Tension between Apple and its court-appointed antitrust monitor continues to mount, as Michael Bromwich has accused the iPad maker of reducing its cooperating with his reviews of the company.

Bromwich


Bronwich has been assigned to keep tabs Apple's operations following an antitrust lawsuit won against the company by the U.S. government. And while Apple and Bromwich have not seen eye to eye from the start, in recent months the relationship has worsened, he said in a report to Judge Denis Cote, as noted by Reuters.

Bromwich told the judge that Apple has taken a more "adversarial tone" in recent discussions. In addition, he said that no interviews have been conducted since January, since Apple has rejected his requests.

Apple has taken issue with the extent of the investigations by Bromwich, alleging that his reviews have gone beyond the original intent by the court. Some outside of the company have agreed, including a circuit court judge and the editorial board of The Wall Street Journal.

In February, the Journal's opinion page slammed Bromwich's approach as being "major abuse, even by the standards of modern antitrust." The newspaper even alleged that Apple should sue Bromwich for his investigation, which has cost the company more than $2.65 million and has involved investigations into Apple's Siri, Maps and hardware engineering groups, none of which are related to the e-book antitrust lawsuit.

Summation
Apple's closing slide in its e-book antitrust case. | Source: U.S. District Court
request to have him removed. Its efforts were shot down by an appellate court, which found that the company failed to provide evidence of irreparable harm.

Last April, Bromwich suggested matters had improved, telling the court that relations between himself and Apple were better off.
«134

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 63
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member
    Bromwich reminds me of Dr Smith in Lost in Space.
  • Reply 2 of 63

    Apple should simply shut down iBook.

     

    It's not worth the hassle, and the DoJ and its lackeys can have/stuff it.

  • Reply 3 of 63
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 4,338member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

     

    Apple should simply shut down iBook.

     

    It's not worth the hassle, and the DoJ and its lackeys can have/stuff it.




    A part of me completely agrees with you.  All else not changing, Apple should shut it down, and boot Bromwich out the door before the ink is dry.



    The other part thinks Apple should pursue every avenue to removing Bromwich, and "somehow" sanctioning the judge that (imho) obviously had a back-end deal with Bromwich.  This whole episode just stinks of abuse.

  • Reply 4 of 63
    freerangefreerange Posts: 1,584member
    This guy is a total incompetent turd who wasn't qualified from the start to monitor anything. The fact that he had to hire someone else to do his appointed job, while still charging Apple outrageous sums for his own time, should have disqualified him immediately. This guy is nothing more than a gold digger.
  • Reply 5 of 63
    Does anyone know if there is a timeframe for the appeals court to rule on the case? It seems like it's been months since that hearing. If they would just rule in Apple's favor this whole thing could disappear tomorrow, though it's unlikely that they could recoup any of the money already paid to Bromwich.
  • Reply 6 of 63

    Kick that guy out and write a check for the difference.

  • Reply 7 of 63
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 4,338member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by rexbinary View Post

     

    Kick that guy out and write a check for the difference.




    Seriously... whatever fine that Apple would have to pay for their "insubordination" would be so infinitesimal, it wouldn't even qualify as a "rounding error" on their books.  Apple should move Bromwich's office to a storage room beneath the A/C unit in the basement and tell the the judge to go f**k herself and wait for the appeal process to run its course.



    Honestly, I really think Apple will win the case.  When that happens, I hope the court system recognizes that the judge crossed a line and has her removed from the bench.

  • Reply 8 of 63
    inklinginkling Posts: 731member
    If you were riding an up-elevator and this Michael Bromwich boarded on the 6th floor, what would you do? Judging by the photograph above, I'd dart off on the 7th floor. He's one spooky looking guy.

    Besides, Bromwich isn't even qualified in anti-trust law, so this highly lucrative appointment by his friend Judge Denise Cote is more than a little suspicious. Google for pictures of her, and not that makes two spooky looking people in this dispute. Could there be something going on between them that we've not been told about?

    And no, Apple should not "shut down iBooks." The dispute was born when a Seattle law firm a mere 10 minutes walk from Amazon's headquarters met with DOJ lawyers, so uou know who is behind this.

    If Apple's executives want to demonstrate that they're qualified to wear 'big boy pants,' they should invest in move that will lead Amazon to rue the day is decided to go after Apple via the DOJ.
  • Reply 9 of 63
    Him little mouse thinking himself big cheese. Watch out for the cat!
  • Reply 10 of 63
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Inkling View Post



    If Apple's executives want to demonstrate that they're qualified to wear 'big boy pants,' they should invest in move that will lead Amazon to rue the day is decided to go after Apple via the DOJ.

    Don't underestimate the size/power of the government.

     

    Principles are crucial, I agree, but there's also such a thing as the smart thing to do (i.e., weighing the potential costs of dragging this on and having this low-life around, versus the costs of letting it all go).

     

    Re, "big boy pants," this one somehow doesn't seem to rise to the level of the battle to pick to demonstrate the size of the pants, IMHO. Moreover, Apple has demonstrated its "big boy pants" in countless different ways in the past decade and a half.

  • Reply 11 of 63
    They should move Bromwich to "Storage C", an even worse fate than Milton's placement in "Storage B". The cockroach problem can likewise be moved onto Bromwich's plate, freeing Milton to seek out a piece of cake, or supplemental staples.
  • Reply 12 of 63
    The entirety of this case is a gross injustice to Apple. The "agency" pricing model (same as used in pricing iTunes music, videos and apps) is perfectly legal.

    Cotes' interpretation of anti-trust is fatally flawed Under the agreements Apple entered into with the publishers, Apple gets the same price as does Amazon (and vice versa), but with Apple onboard Amazon could no longer sell eBooks for below cost as the publishers required Amazon to adopt the "agency" model.

    Forcing consumers to pay cost plus is not harmful to the consumers, UNLESS it can be shown that the publishers colluded to set retail pricing. In any event Apple demonstrated that it was not party to any such discussions, further that IF those discussions of that nature did in fact take place, Apple was unaware of them.
  • Reply 13 of 63
    gtrgtr Posts: 3,231member
  • Reply 14 of 63
    Apple should simply shut down iBook.

    It's not worth the hassle, and the DoJ and its lackeys can have/stuff it.

    For a minute I was worried you thought Amazon needed competition. /s
  • Reply 15 of 63
    He's just jealous his repeated request for a free Apple Watch Edition went ignored.
  • Reply 16 of 63
    mac_dogmac_dog Posts: 622member
    gift him with the cheapest android watch.
  • Reply 17 of 63
    magman1979magman1979 Posts: 1,090member
    Quote:



    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

     

    Apple should simply shut down iBook.

     

    It's not worth the hassle, and the DoJ and its lackeys can have/stuff it.


     

    That would be the same as if Apple just raised the white flag, admitted guilt, and allowed a corrupt judge and two-bit schister to win. They need to fight this all the way to the bitter end on principle!

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mac_dog View Post



    gift him with the cheapest android watch.

     

    Probably a Galaxy Gear then :D

  • Reply 18 of 63
    magman1979magman1979 Posts: 1,090member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by GTR View Post



    Michael Bromwich:







    What a f*cking idiot.



    That picture makes me think he's saying to the camera man "Oh, you want me to say something intelligent now?"

  • Reply 19 of 63
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,435member
    [quote]Bromwich told the judge that Apple has taken a more "adversarial tone"[/quote]

    The next time we want your opinion Mr. Bromwhich, we'll give it to you.

    Seriously, shouldn't he simply stick to his fact finding(?)
  • Reply 20 of 63
    gtrgtr Posts: 3,231member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MagMan1979 View Post

     

    That picture makes me think he's saying to the camera man "Oh, you want me to say something intelligent now?"


     

    This is what Bromwich was thinking...

     

Sign In or Register to comment.