These two questions will always be asked: 1. Who allowed Amazon to set market prices when they were the only real game in town. 2. When has the govt acted so fast before in a relatively new market. Shouldn't market forces be given some time to work?
"The U.S. government leveled the suit after an investigation into Apple's "agency model" price structure, which operates on a "most favored nations" basis that disallows content owners to sell their wares to another retailer for a lower price."
That sure looks like price-fixing. But of course this is Apple we're talking about, so of course everybody else is wrong.
Isn't Amazon doing the same thing with that British publisher?
Well, Big Five publishers pay advances against royalties to authors. "Advances" are cash up front to the author for projected royalties. Even if they are typically not huge, advances are a HUGE benefit to an author: even if the book doesn't hit projections they don't need to pay the advance back (although they do have to pay it back if they never finish the manuscript). And, guess what, most books do not hit projections: editors are eternal optimists.
It is true that some (very few) authors have done very well self publishing through Amazon, selling their ebooks for $2.99 or whatever. But Amazon is working hard to drive all ebook prices down. How well do you think your self-published book selling at $2.99 will do when it is up against big-name authors at the same price?
Amazon had the influence with Obama, so Amazon got it's monopoly protected by Obama's thugs.
Obama had nothing to do with this- please stop desperately dragging him in every fucking issue just so that you can bash the guy.
But I agree this ruling is ridiculous. Apple is being punished for creating competition, not stifling it. We've seen what Amazon is willing to do with its monopoly, which is deciding which books and publishers it wants to stock and using its selling power as leverage and blackmail.
Well, Big Five publishers pay advances against royalties to authors. "Advances" are cash up front to the author for projected royalties. Even if they are typically not huge, advances are a HUGE benefit to an author: even if the book doesn't hit projections they don't need to pay the advance back (although they do have to pay it back if they never finish the manuscript). And, guess what, most books do not hit projections: editors are eternal optimists.
It is true that some (very few) authors have done very well self publishing through Amazon, selling their ebooks for $2.99 or whatever. But Amazon is working hard to drive all ebook prices down. How well do you think your self-published book selling at $2.99 will do when it is up against big-name authors at the same price?
I'm not up to speed on the publishing houses, but in the music industry the labels are now writing so-called "360 deals" that allow them to take a cut of virtually any revenue stream to recover record deal advances, and some are coming after other assets including houses, spousal retirement accounts, etc. The days of advances that don't have to be paid back appear to be over.
Do you think the authors make more on books sold thru Apple than Amazon? I don't know. I do know I don't hear much about fair play for the authors. It's nearly always the "poor publishers".
Edit: Here's a report on author earnings I just stumbled on. In a quick read it would appear authors are better off NOT dealing with the Big 5 publishers if they have an option. http://authorearnings.com/the-report/
I utterly agree with your point.
Authors currently see very little of the revenue under either system and, as content creators, that is just plain wrong.
And, as a consumer, I'm also sick of publishers regularly failing to make created content available to purchase "anywhere, anytime".
In the future, I'd like to see the middlemen cut out as much as possible while still maintaining the same, or similar level of quality. And this doesn't just apply to the book industry: they should follow suit in the music and other industries as well.
Amazon has a subscription service for $9.95 a month, but they have to pay an author/publisher every time a new person opens that book to read it?
So why doesn't everyone sign up to this, then just spend a couple days opening every single book they can, flip a couple pages, then close it and move on to the next one?
That way Amazon has to pay the author/publisher far more than what they would get from all of us paying them $9.99 for the month.
Seems to me we could all bankrupt Amazon in a very short amount of time if we felt like it.
PS: In Canada it amazes me that each and every city you travel to has the exact same gas prices. Every company charges the same. No price fixing there... Calgary $114.9/litre no matter where you buy it, Vancouver $1.51/litre, etc. Could you lend us Judge Cote for a few months to pre-determine a collusion lawsuit against all of the big oil companies please?
PSS: Could you have to DOJ look into those penny bid sites please? Quibids, Madbids, etc. When they "sell" a product they are "selling" it for like 40,000% markup versus going to Best Buy or FutureShop (24,141 bids at 18¢ per bid = $4345.38 for an item that retails for $719) . Heck half the time I bid and bid and never even get the product. Yet I have to pay for each failed bid - Judge Cote HELP!!!
PSSS: Dear Government, don't tell me what to pay for something. Let me decide how much is too much on my own. If I am too stupid to check around then please remove all internet access from me and don't let me watch TV. Thanks.
PSSSS: Was I supposed to put the /sarcasm tags throughout this?
And Al Gore needs the boot from the board... if he can't deliver pull to stop stuff like this, why are they paying him? Advice? From the guy who gave us global warming, even after it was disproven? LOL
Regardless of the travesty of justice that this issue represents, I would guess that Tim Cook is a leftist based on his public comments and actions.
Al Gore was recruited to Apple by Steve Jobs, and he has been a board member during an unprecedented period of success not only for Apple but any major corporation. How do you know that he has not played a major role in the decisions that led to that success? Singling him out for disdain speaks to your own ignorance and prejudice.
Amazon had the influence with Obama, so Amazon got it's monopoly protected by Obama's thugs.
And as always the Apple Insider article sounds written by a clueless leftist.
Apple is barred from COMPETING with Amazon. COMPETITION is not "unsavory".
Total travesty of justice here, Cote belongs behind bars for the rest of her life.
And Al Gore needs the boot from the board... if he can't deliver pull to stop stuff like this, why are they paying him? Advice? From the guy who gave us global warming, even after it was disproven? LOL
I wish you poor rabid right-wing frothers would show some imagination with your conspiracy dramas. Do you think the current spying programs were made up out of thin air during the Obama administration, or do they maybe go back to the Cheney years? Now, with that in mind, make a little leap in logic. Why is Amazon being protected and Apple harassed? Which of the two has the more interesting data base on the US citizenry, and yet says nothing about keeping every door to that data closed?
I myself don't believe any of this, but it's a lot more likely than your Obamathug scenario.
Regardless of the travesty of justice that this issue represents, I would guess that Tim Cook is a leftist based on his public comments and actions.
Al Gore was recruited to Apple by Steve Jobs, and he has been a board member during an unprecedented period of success not only for Apple but any major corporation. How do you know that he has not played a major role in the decisions that led to that success? Singling him out for disdain speaks to your own ignorance and prejudice.
<span style="line-height:1.4em;">Be careful when you expose yourself as a </span>
dumbass conservative<span style="line-height:1.4em;">. Although it obviously does not agree with your worldview, global</span>
<span style="line-height:1.4em;"> warming is a </span>
fact. Besides you, the only<span style="line-height:1.4em;"> people who debate it are fellow dumbasses Rush Limbaugh, Fox News and every GOP politician with his nose shoved up the oil industry's ass. Within the actual scientific community, there is consensus about our effects on the world's environment. But you undoubtedly already know that, and it just bugs the shit out of you.</span>
You are so wasting your time there. You can't expect people that feel the need to drag political intrigue and conspiracy in everything, to listen to reason let alone understand half of what you said. I just immediately put them in my block list and read all the well written and intelligent comments, even if I don't agree with many, they at least are food for thought. Crap like the one you responded to are not worth the effort.
Whether Apple is wrong or wrong about this, what gets me is that big companies these days "settle" investigations and lawsuits brought by the government. What ever happened to the government slapping fines on companies to pay? You and I certainly do not get to "settle" with the government. We would have to say "thank you" and pay our fine.
Whether Apple is wrong or wrong about this, what gets me is that big companies these days "settle" investigations and lawsuits brought by the government. What ever happened to the government slapping fines on companies to pay? You and I certainly do not get to "settle" with the government. We would have to say "thank you" and pay our fine.
A fine is a settlement. You could go to court if you wanted. Of course, for stuff like traffic violations it is arranged such that settlement is up front and mandatory. You'd have to go to court to get your money back.
Comments
1. Who allowed Amazon to set market prices when they were the only real game in town.
2. When has the govt acted so fast before in a relatively new market. Shouldn't market forces be given some time to work?
Isn't Amazon doing the same thing with that British publisher?
http://www.salon.com/2014/03/27/you_cant_buy_that_the_great_e_book_royalty_war/
The picture of the poor aggrieved publisher is not as black and white as some posters here apparently think.
A half billion dollar, illegal, shakedown.
Amazon had the influence with Obama, so Amazon got it's monopoly protected by Obama's thugs.
Obama had nothing to do with this- please stop desperately dragging him in every fucking issue just so that you can bash the guy.
But I agree this ruling is ridiculous. Apple is being punished for creating competition, not stifling it. We've seen what Amazon is willing to do with its monopoly, which is deciding which books and publishers it wants to stock and using its selling power as leverage and blackmail.
And yet the DOJ uses the Sherman Act to grant Amazon a virtual ebook monopoly. Shameless...
Well, Big Five publishers pay advances against royalties to authors. "Advances" are cash up front to the author for projected royalties. Even if they are typically not huge, advances are a HUGE benefit to an author: even if the book doesn't hit projections they don't need to pay the advance back (although they do have to pay it back if they never finish the manuscript). And, guess what, most books do not hit projections: editors are eternal optimists.
It is true that some (very few) authors have done very well self publishing through Amazon, selling their ebooks for $2.99 or whatever. But Amazon is working hard to drive all ebook prices down. How well do you think your self-published book selling at $2.99 will do when it is up against big-name authors at the same price?
I'm not up to speed on the publishing houses, but in the music industry the labels are now writing so-called "360 deals" that allow them to take a cut of virtually any revenue stream to recover record deal advances, and some are coming after other assets including houses, spousal retirement accounts, etc. The days of advances that don't have to be paid back appear to be over.
I utterly agree with your point.
Authors currently see very little of the revenue under either system and, as content creators, that is just plain wrong.
And, as a consumer, I'm also sick of publishers regularly failing to make created content available to purchase "anywhere, anytime".
In the future, I'd like to see the middlemen cut out as much as possible while still maintaining the same, or similar level of quality. And this doesn't just apply to the book industry: they should follow suit in the music and other industries as well.
So if I read this correctly....
Amazon has a subscription service for $9.95 a month, but they have to pay an author/publisher every time a new person opens that book to read it?
So why doesn't everyone sign up to this, then just spend a couple days opening every single book they can, flip a couple pages, then close it and move on to the next one?
That way Amazon has to pay the author/publisher far more than what they would get from all of us paying them $9.99 for the month.
Seems to me we could all bankrupt Amazon in a very short amount of time if we felt like it.
PS: In Canada it amazes me that each and every city you travel to has the exact same gas prices. Every company charges the same. No price fixing there... Calgary $114.9/litre no matter where you buy it, Vancouver $1.51/litre, etc. Could you lend us Judge Cote for a few months to pre-determine a collusion lawsuit against all of the big oil companies please?
PSS: Could you have to DOJ look into those penny bid sites please? Quibids, Madbids, etc. When they "sell" a product they are "selling" it for like 40,000% markup versus going to Best Buy or FutureShop (24,141 bids at 18¢ per bid = $4345.38 for an item that retails for $719) . Heck half the time I bid and bid and never even get the product. Yet I have to pay for each failed bid - Judge Cote HELP!!!
PSSS: Dear Government, don't tell me what to pay for something. Let me decide how much is too much on my own. If I am too stupid to check around then please remove all internet access from me and don't let me watch TV. Thanks.
PSSSS: Was I supposed to put the /sarcasm tags throughout this?
PSSSSS: How many PSSSSSSes is too many?
And Al Gore needs the boot from the board... if he can't deliver pull to stop stuff like this, why are they paying him? Advice? From the guy who gave us global warming, even after it was disproven? LOL
Regardless of the travesty of justice that this issue represents, I would guess that Tim Cook is a leftist based on his public comments and actions.
Al Gore was recruited to Apple by Steve Jobs, and he has been a board member during an unprecedented period of success not only for Apple but any major corporation. How do you know that he has not played a major role in the decisions that led to that success? Singling him out for disdain speaks to your own ignorance and prejudice.
I wish you poor rabid right-wing frothers would show some imagination with your conspiracy dramas. Do you think the current spying programs were made up out of thin air during the Obama administration, or do they maybe go back to the Cheney years? Now, with that in mind, make a little leap in logic. Why is Amazon being protected and Apple harassed? Which of the two has the more interesting data base on the US citizenry, and yet says nothing about keeping every door to that data closed?
I myself don't believe any of this, but it's a lot more likely than your Obamathug scenario.
You are so wasting your time there. You can't expect people that feel the need to drag political intrigue and conspiracy in everything, to listen to reason let alone understand half of what you said. I just immediately put them in my block list and read all the well written and intelligent comments, even if I don't agree with many, they at least are food for thought. Crap like the one you responded to are not worth the effort.
Total travesty of justice here, Cote belongs behind bars for the rest of her life.
Whether Apple is wrong or wrong about this, what gets me is that big companies these days "settle" investigations and lawsuits brought by the government. What ever happened to the government slapping fines on companies to pay? You and I certainly do not get to "settle" with the government. We would have to say "thank you" and pay our fine.
A fine is a settlement. You could go to court if you wanted. Of course, for stuff like traffic violations it is arranged such that settlement is up front and mandatory. You'd have to go to court to get your money back.
Total travesty of justice here, Cote belongs behind bars for the rest of her life.
Echo!