It believed that windowing led to the alienation of customers and piracy. The judge says, “Another strategy that Publisher Defendants adopted in 2009 to combat Amazon’s $9.99 pricing was the delayed release or ‘withholding’ of the e-book versions of New Releases, a practice that was also called ‘windowing.'”Īpple didn’t want this. “Apple seized the moment and brilliantly played its hand,” writes the judge, adding the iBookstore “provided the Publisher Defendants with the vision, the format, the timetable, and the coordination that they needed to raise e-book prices.”Īlthough the case centered on the price collusion, and meetings in 2009 and later deal-work that is said to have prompted excited publishers to make a flurry of calls how Apple’s entry into the business could be used for advantage, the judge notes how the publishers worked in concert in other ways. Apple did so as it sought to introduce its iBookstore around the time of its iPad launch. That was the impetus behind a move from the wholesale model to an agency one that would be enforced through so-called Most Favored Nation contractual clauses. She adds, “For their part, if the Publisher Defendants were going to take control of e-book pricing and move the price point above $9.99, they needed to act collectively any other course would leave an individual Publisher vulnerable to retaliation from Amazon.” “At their very first meetings in mid-December 2009, the Publishers conveyed to Apple their abhorrence of Amazon’s pricing, and Apple assured the Publishers it was willing to work with them to raise those prices, suggesting prices such as $12.99 and $14.99,” says Judge Cote in summarizing the findings. Also called to testify were executives at Amazon and Google and several economists. The trial that ended on June 20 brought out top executives from CBS Corp’s Simon & Schuster Inc., News Corp.’s HarperCollins Publishers Inc, Penguin, Lagardere SCA’s Hachette Book Group, and Macmillan - the companies that came to an agreement with the government to settle antitrust claims.Īt a bench trial, Judge Cote also heard from Eddy Cue, Apple’s senior vp of internet software and services, Keith Moerer, director of iTunes and Kevin Saul, Apple’s associate general counsel. “Without Apple’s orchestration of this conspiracy, it would not have succeeded as it did in the Spring of 2010.” “The plaintiffs have shown that the publisher defendants conspired with each other to eliminate retail price competition in order to raise e-book prices, and that Apple played a central role in facilitating and executing that conspiracy,” wrote Judge Cote said in a 160-page ruling. ![]() District Judge Denise Cote said the government has proven its case. ![]() 'Joy Ride' Director Responds to Critic Claiming the Film "Targets White People"
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |