Ebook Pricing Court Battles

An appeals court this week refused to halt a trial that could require Apple(s aapl) to pay hundreds of millions of dollars over price-fixing, even as the company continues to deny any wrong-doing and seeks an appeal.

In a succinct order, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit said a trial can go forward on July 14 that will determine how much Apple should pay for brokering a conspiracy with book publishers to fix the price of ebooks.

In April, class action lawyer Steve Berman said, “Consumers could see a judgment of between $750 to $850 million,” as punishment related to Justice Denise Cote’s conclusion last year that Apple organized the scheme.

The five publishers who participated in the conspiracy have already settled, resulting in consumers receiving emails telling them of credits paid to their Kindle(s amzn) and Barnes & Nobel accounts. This week’s appeals court ruling means that those consumers are likely to receive emails notifying…

View original post 88 more words

The absurd ebook case: Apple fights on as consumers spend settlement money at Amazon

27 April 2014 by particularkev

Gigaom

The high-fives must have been flying at Amazon(s amzn) this morning: millions of the company’s customers got notices to spend credits at its Kindle store, and Amazon didn’t have to pay a cent. Meanwhile, rival Apple(s aapl) will likely underwrite an even bigger shopping spree for Amazon customers sometime yet year.

Welcome to the ironic denouement of l’affaire ebooks, which reached a climax in 2013 when a federal judge found that Apple had brokered a conspiracy with book publishers to fix prices. The legal tussle resulted in the publishers settling their cases — which is what paid for the customer credits that went out today — while Apple fought on alone.

For now, the biggest winner is Amazon, which already dominated the ebook market at the time of the price-fixing scheme in 2010. Today, as a result of lawsuits brought by the Justice Department and state governments, Amazon is in an even stronger position with the publishers; it will also get a healthy cut of the $160 million or…

View original post 305 more words

Apple stuck with antitrust monitor after appeals court refuses removal request

11 February 2014 by particularkev

Gigaom

A federal appeals court has refused to stay an order that imposes an antitrust monitor on Apple, despite the company’s complaints that the monitor has been conducting an illegal roving investigation.

In a ruling published on Monday, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals wrote that the dispute came down to a disagreement over what the monitor was empowered to do, and adopted the Justice Department’s position that the monitor was limited to verifying whether Apple was informing its employees about their duty to comply with an anti-trust order from last year.

The original order imposing the monitor came as part of a larger decision last year in which a New York federal judge concluded that Apple had violated antitrust laws by brokering an illegal conspiracy with publishers to fix the price of ebooks.

Apple, which is appealing the overall decision, has accused the monitor, Michael Bromwich, of starting his duties…

View original post 185 more words

Appeals court has harsh words for Apple and DOJ in fight over antitrust monitor

10 February 2014 by particularkev

Gigaom

A three-judge panel rebuked lawyers for Apple(s aapl) and the federal government on Tuesday morning, as the two sides argued over what to do about a court-appointed monitor that Apple claims is running an unconstitutional investigation into the company’s business practices.

Apple complained that Bromwich, who has no experience in antitrust law, has already billed Apple over $130,000 to investigate the company, and that he has made premature demands to meet with everyone from lead designer Jony Ive to former U.S. Vice President Al Gore, who sits on Apple’s board. The government countered that Apple does not want to comply with the law.

In hearing arguments from Apple and the Justice Department, the judges expressed skepticism for both sides’ positions, and hinted they may issue an order to spell out the duties of the monitor. More broadly, the fight over the monitor is the latest twist in Apple’s ongoing effort…

View original post 865 more words