[I]The DOJ settlement would also go beyond e-books, prohibiting Apple from entering agreements with suppliers of "music, movies, television shows or other content that are likely to increase the prices at which Apple's competitor retailers may sell that content.[/I]
This doesn't make sense (in addition to all the other inconsistencies). Amazon already competes with iTunes and is cheaper for some content. How can they retroactively impose conditions?
Considering that some of the people who post here may not have English as their native language, it's always nice to just take a moment and wonder how well you might do making a post in their own language.
A job worth doing is worth doing well, is it not ? How can one learn if nobody will take the time to inform ?
"The DOJ settlement would also go beyond e-books, prohibiting Apple from entering agreements with suppliers of "music, movies, television shows or other content..."
Whoa! This is reaching. And it seems a little extreme.
"The DOJ settlement would also go beyond e-books, prohibiting Apple from entering agreements with suppliers of "music, movies, television shows or other content..."
Whoa! This is reaching. And it seems a little extreme.
Its not reaching, DOJ accused Apple of price fixing (colluding with suppliers to raise prices), and so they don't want the same thing to happen for any other content that Apple sells.
"... prohibiting Apple from entering agreements with suppliers ... that are likely to increase the prices at which Apple's competitor retailers may sell that content."
Not sure how much it will help but it can't hurt. Especially if it gets enough hits to go public quickly. And as I recall if it gets something like 100,000 by the end of the month the White House will issue a response (even if to say no)
We still don't know what the new iBooks agreements will look like? Are publishers still free to set their own prices or will Amazon dictate the prices for all book publishers under the guise of "fairness"? I still think that publishers should set their own book prices. I hate the idea of one size fits all book pricing. Most older books should cost just a buck or less while newer trade editions should cost $20 or $30 or even more. That way we can build our libraries of eBooks to match the physical copies we have already purchased for a reasonable price and won't be so tempted to pirate everything. I see this DOJ settlement as a disaster for authors and publishers.
No, the publishers wanted the prices to rise. And could have achieved that by refusing to renew contracts with Amazon etc unless they got terms they wanted. They could stop offering ebooks or do so in private sites with whatever pricing they wanted.
Apple was willing to let them control pricing with a limit on how high that could go, to protect customers as Apple felt an Ebook shouldn't be as high as a paper one (if only they could get that same logic working with movies and TV shows).
As for the whole same price thing. Everyone has those clauses in their deals to prevent anyone from undercutting them. It's not just Apple. But that wasn't really the issue that the DOJ was nagging on. It was the agency terms which gave publishers control and how having Apple in the arena gave the publishers a way to say no to Amazon and force publisher friendly contract terms they couldn't get before because Amazon was the only viable choice thanks to their predatory pricing tricks, exclusive deals etc
Please take the time to learn the difference between... there and their ... it will make you appear to be more intelligent and will make your posts seem more relevent. Just sayin' ...
The whole "their" , "there" , "they're" heterographs issue shows the sorry state of education. When I was in grade school in the 1960s this was pounded into me almost every day along with "to" , "two" , and "too" , another pet peeve of educated individuals when used incorrectly.
And yes, it DOES impact the impression people have of you and therefore your opinions too.
Apple should put some Fed members on its board. This will resolve all the issues. Bernanke is retiring from federal reserve. Put him in to become the financial Chief. He will still have more pull on the world than our current President. His buddies will still be running the game show!
Which is exactly what happened to AT&T when the DOJ broke them up. They were forced to lease their switch ports, their copper cable pairs, all their infrastructure to competitors at a wholesale price determined by the government. A "competitor" could open up shop on paper only and then resell AT&T services cheaper than AT&T was selling them. And they called it competition. Say you and I want to open a hamburger stand but we don't have the cash to do it. We simply go to the government and ask them to force McDonalds to lease us a spot in their restaurants, use their supplies and cookers, all at a steep discount. Now we can start selling hamburgers, inside a McDonalds, at a cheaper price than McDonalds.
This is what this proposed settlement is suggesting. Force Apple to let competitors advertise, for free, on iTunes, all on Apple's dime.
Unfortunately, they have it backwards.
When AT&T was broken up, they had all those requirements because they had previously been a regulated monopoly. There was no way a competitor could compete without access to their network.
In the Apple case, that's backwards, Amazon was the one with monopoly power and Apple was trying to break that monopoly. If the AT&T case were to be used as precedent, then AMAZON should have been forced to advertise for Apple, not vice versa.
This case isn't over yet. Apple will not give up until they get a Supreme Court ruling. So whatever the DOJ and Amazon want doesn't matter right now.
Because there are going to be a few more years before what happens next will happen if it happens at all. The judge was paid off when they had there first court case with the DOJ. Hopefully the appeals judge will actually be a judge and not a puppet for the DOJ like the first one. She made up her mind before the case even started. Then when the case did go through and the DOJ actually proved NOTHING, she still ruled against Apple. I'm hoping the appeals court will actually listen to what Apple testified in the first trial and see that they did there business exactly like Amazon. Which means Amazon should be put on trial too.
Exactly. When the judge announces to the world that Apple's guilty before the trial even begins, there's no way that her decision is going to stand up on appeal.
We still don't know what the new iBooks agreements will look like?
Yes we do. At least for the next five years. If the DOJ gets their way there won't be any deals. They will force iBooks to end for that time. Folks only choices will be Kindle, Nook etc.
The bigger problem is the extension of the settlement beyond e-books to TV, music, etc. How the hell is that supposed to work? Must Apple run all contracts with all content providers everywhere past Google, Amazon, Samsung, MS, B&N, etc. first to see if they think it's fair? It's the single most anti-competitive, anti-business BS I have ever seen. It's as if the DOJ wants to put Apple out of business entirely!
Please take the time to learn the difference between... there and their ... it will make you appear to be more intelligent and will make your posts seem more relevent. Just sayin' ...
Well, english is a second language to me, was born and raise in french and still work in french too. So there are some glitches. Thanks to pointing it out, so I can improve myself. Funny thing is when I wrote that word I hesitated and knew something was wrong, but could not figure out what.
While at it, I think Apple should open itune stores on android, and windows mobile and sell content in those market... and an app store too! Why not open an itune store and an "app store" on amazon tablets. If they refuse, you take down there app on iOS ! Same goes for google. Openning stores in others ecosystems can be a double edge sword. Facetime and imessage should be ported to other platforms too.
Apple wont do it because it fears it will allow people trap in its ecosystem to flee elsewhere. Bunch of cowards!
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
This is actually not a bad idea.
I've always thought that Apple should also make iWork and iLife available on all platforms. They would make a killing. (I am also confident that, once people have experienced Apple's software -- except for Mail and iCloud both of which should be either revamped or shut down -- they'll slowly start to migrate to Apple hardware: i.e., they'd be excellent gateway products).
Actually it is really bad idea. why are all the other platform having issue, due to the large fragmentation and support issue. Apple does not have these kinds of issue. they are open as a close system can be with our having all the down sides of a completely "open" system. Apple only has to worry about their product working and anyone who develops for them has very good set of guidelines to follow to ensure their product work.
If you think I am kidding go look at Itunes on a PC, there are loads of problems it works great for some people and others have all kinds of issues. It could be what hardware they are using which version of windows or some other program they have install that is causing the problem. Itunes on PC is perfect example of why apple should not do as suggest above.
Comments
This doesn't make sense (in addition to all the other inconsistencies).
Amazon already competes with iTunes and is cheaper for some content.
How can they retroactively impose conditions?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave MacLachlan
Considering that some of the people who post here may not have English as their native language, it's always nice to just take a moment and wonder how well you might do making a post in their own language.
A job worth doing is worth doing well, is it not ? How can one learn if nobody will take the time to inform ?
Whoa! This is reaching. And it seems a little extreme.
Or how about the nobody forces anything on anybody?
This again.
The DOJ should be investigated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hewsthat
"The DOJ settlement would also go beyond e-books, prohibiting Apple from entering agreements with suppliers of "music, movies, television shows or other content..."
Whoa! This is reaching. And it seems a little extreme.
Its not reaching, DOJ accused Apple of price fixing (colluding with suppliers to raise prices), and so they don't want the same thing to happen for any other content that Apple sells.
"... prohibiting Apple from entering agreements with suppliers ... that are likely to increase the prices at which Apple's competitor retailers may sell that content."
Http://wh.gov/lr8uW
Not sure how much it will help but it can't hurt. Especially if it gets enough hits to go public quickly. And as I recall if it gets something like 100,000 by the end of the month the White House will issue a response (even if to say no)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruggedchess
Not sure why Apple's attorneys did not take this approach....
Apple desperately needs a new legal crew. And, while they're at it, a new PR crew.
No, the publishers wanted the prices to rise. And could have achieved that by refusing to renew contracts with Amazon etc unless they got terms they wanted. They could stop offering ebooks or do so in private sites with whatever pricing they wanted.
Apple was willing to let them control pricing with a limit on how high that could go, to protect customers as Apple felt an Ebook shouldn't be as high as a paper one (if only they could get that same logic working with movies and TV shows).
As for the whole same price thing. Everyone has those clauses in their deals to prevent anyone from undercutting them. It's not just Apple. But that wasn't really the issue that the DOJ was nagging on. It was the agency terms which gave publishers control and how having Apple in the arena gave the publishers a way to say no to Amazon and force publisher friendly contract terms they couldn't get before because Amazon was the only viable choice thanks to their predatory pricing tricks, exclusive deals etc
Quote:
Originally Posted by newbee
Please take the time to learn the difference between... there and their ... it will make you appear to be more intelligent and will make your posts seem more relevent. Just sayin' ...
The whole "their" , "there" , "they're" heterographs issue shows the sorry state of education. When I was in grade school in the 1960s this was pounded into me almost every day along with "to" , "two" , and "too" , another pet peeve of educated individuals when used incorrectly.
And yes, it DOES impact the impression people have of you and therefore your opinions too.
Apple should put some Fed members on its board. This will resolve all the issues. Bernanke is retiring from federal reserve. Put him in to become the financial Chief. He will still have more pull on the world than our current President. His buddies will still be running the game show!
Federal Reserve rules the World!
Unfortunately, they have it backwards.
When AT&T was broken up, they had all those requirements because they had previously been a regulated monopoly. There was no way a competitor could compete without access to their network.
In the Apple case, that's backwards, Amazon was the one with monopoly power and Apple was trying to break that monopoly. If the AT&T case were to be used as precedent, then AMAZON should have been forced to advertise for Apple, not vice versa.
Exactly. When the judge announces to the world that Apple's guilty before the trial even begins, there's no way that her decision is going to stand up on appeal.
Amazon is a competitor that would want to damage the Apple brand at all cost.
Yes we do. At least for the next five years. If the DOJ gets their way there won't be any deals. They will force iBooks to end for that time. Folks only choices will be Kindle, Nook etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by newbee
Please take the time to learn the difference between... there and their ... it will make you appear to be more intelligent and will make your posts seem more relevent. Just sayin' ...
Well, english is a second language to me, was born and raise in french and still work in french too. So there are some glitches. Thanks to pointing it out, so I can improve myself. Funny thing is when I wrote that word I hesitated and knew something was wrong, but could not figure out what.
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbapou
I feel like provocative today!
While at it, I think Apple should open itune stores on android, and windows mobile and sell content in those market... and an app store too! Why not open an itune store and an "app store" on amazon tablets. If they refuse, you take down there app on iOS ! Same goes for google. Openning stores in others ecosystems can be a double edge sword. Facetime and imessage should be ported to other platforms too.
Apple wont do it because it fears it will allow people trap in its ecosystem to flee elsewhere. Bunch of cowards!
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
This is actually not a bad idea.
I've always thought that Apple should also make iWork and iLife available on all platforms. They would make a killing. (I am also confident that, once people have experienced Apple's software -- except for Mail and iCloud both of which should be either revamped or shut down -- they'll slowly start to migrate to Apple hardware: i.e., they'd be excellent gateway products).
Actually it is really bad idea. why are all the other platform having issue, due to the large fragmentation and support issue. Apple does not have these kinds of issue. they are open as a close system can be with our having all the down sides of a completely "open" system. Apple only has to worry about their product working and anyone who develops for them has very good set of guidelines to follow to ensure their product work.
If you think I am kidding go look at Itunes on a PC, there are loads of problems it works great for some people and others have all kinds of issues. It could be what hardware they are using which version of windows or some other program they have install that is causing the problem. Itunes on PC is perfect example of why apple should not do as suggest above.