Judge grants class status in e-books price fixing case against Apple
A U.S. district court judge on Friday ruled plaintiffs seeking class status in a suit against Apple over e-book price fixing had "more than met their burden" to sue as a group.
Judge Denise Cote of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York handed down the latest decision in her oversight of the Apple e-books case, granting class status to consumers looking to sue Apple for damages relating to the company's illegal e-book pricing, reports Reuters.
In her ruling, Judge Cote denied Apple's argument that claimed plaintiffs' claims were too diverse for the group to be considered for class status. Apple additionally contended consumers were not harmed because e-book pricing fell during and after the iBookstore launched, a claim the company pushed in its antitrust case against the U.S. Department of Justice.
The outcome may not be surprising considering Judge Cote presided over the DOJ's case as well. The jurist's ruling in that action found Apple liable of conspiring with five major book publishers to falsely inflate e-book prices. That decision brought an injunction against Apple, demanding it not enter similar offending agreements with publishers, as well as the installment of antitrust monitor Michael Bromwich.
Apple and Bromwich have butted heads from the beginning. The Cupertino, Calif., company accused the ECM of conducting a wide-roving and unconstitutional investigation that goes far beyond his court-constructed jurisdiction. Bromwich, on the other hand, said Apple is difficult to work with as it does not supply requested evidence, interviews and other deemed necessary assets in a timely manner, or at all.
Apple has attempted to dislodge Bromwich from his post, though efforts have been fruitless thus far.
Judge Cote is slated to oversee both the consumer class action suit ruled on today and another involving 33 states and U.S. territories that sued Apple on behalf of consumers. A damages number has yet to be assigned to the consumer class action, though some expect it to run into the hundreds of millions of dollars. As for the states, they are seeking more than $800 million in damages.
Judge Denise Cote of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York handed down the latest decision in her oversight of the Apple e-books case, granting class status to consumers looking to sue Apple for damages relating to the company's illegal e-book pricing, reports Reuters.
In her ruling, Judge Cote denied Apple's argument that claimed plaintiffs' claims were too diverse for the group to be considered for class status. Apple additionally contended consumers were not harmed because e-book pricing fell during and after the iBookstore launched, a claim the company pushed in its antitrust case against the U.S. Department of Justice.
The outcome may not be surprising considering Judge Cote presided over the DOJ's case as well. The jurist's ruling in that action found Apple liable of conspiring with five major book publishers to falsely inflate e-book prices. That decision brought an injunction against Apple, demanding it not enter similar offending agreements with publishers, as well as the installment of antitrust monitor Michael Bromwich.
Apple and Bromwich have butted heads from the beginning. The Cupertino, Calif., company accused the ECM of conducting a wide-roving and unconstitutional investigation that goes far beyond his court-constructed jurisdiction. Bromwich, on the other hand, said Apple is difficult to work with as it does not supply requested evidence, interviews and other deemed necessary assets in a timely manner, or at all.
Apple has attempted to dislodge Bromwich from his post, though efforts have been fruitless thus far.
Judge Cote is slated to oversee both the consumer class action suit ruled on today and another involving 33 states and U.S. territories that sued Apple on behalf of consumers. A damages number has yet to be assigned to the consumer class action, though some expect it to run into the hundreds of millions of dollars. As for the states, they are seeking more than $800 million in damages.
Comments
Where are the APPLE IS DOOMED guys?
Shouldn't there be a different judge presiding over the case? Cote already made up her mind. Now it's just a farce.
Agreed. It is insane that someone that already has made a judgement that is up for appeal is allowed to preside over this case. It seems prejudicial. I'm not a lawyer so I can't speak to the legal nature of it but it just boggles my mind.
On the ebook issue I was looking forward to saving trees and therefore lower costs to read books in as much as there were no longer "production and shipping and handling costs". Boy was I wrong! At some point excessive markups become unethical?
I just received my Amazon refund on ebooks for antitrust settlements and am looking forward to more $$ from Apple now regarding their "illegal e-book pricing".
Is it so wrong for an author to want consumers to see value and want to pay for their works, instead of them seeing book content as a dime store price entitlement. Once a certain ebook seller has the monopoly, do you really think they will remain at these deflated prices? The will go up and up and we will see the very problem the DOJ thought they were preventing come true.
I agree that this class being presided over by a judge that has this and all related cases with a predetermined guilty verdict toward Apple is a farce. We all know she made up her mind even before the trial started. She pretty much admitted to it without saying exactly that in the news.
Odd, I just got my account credited the other day. It doesn't seem right that Apple can be sued again and have to pay out more money.
Odd, I just got my account credited the other day. It doesn't seem right that Apple can be sued again and have to pay out more money.
That money was from the publishers, who settled with the government and agreed to pay.
What I don't understand is how Apple can be sued by the states, and also by consumers, each asking for hundreds of millions of dollars (with triple damages). Something that wasn't mentioned in this story is that Cote accepted the consumers' experts on damages, but rejected Apple's experts. So again from the start Cote is fixing the trial.
Can't wait to see Apple's appeal get started because that will be with a different judge and that will definitely change the outcome of all of this non-sense from Ms.puppet Coyte.
Apple did no damage because Apple didn't do anything wrong and there's proof out there already.
Cote... Epitome of corruption!
To me the only way this makes sense is for Bazos to be pulling the strings !
Who else?
http://daringfireball.net/2014/03/if_tim_cook_had_been_in_charge
Cote is a puppet, not a judge. She doesn't go by evidence, she goes by who she thinks is guilty and that's that.
Ummm like %95 of all judges? That's why we have so many innocent people in jail. Some judges even make up the charges before the trial even starts!!
Apple should be seeking an injunction, pending their appeal.