backtop


Print 12 comment(s) - last by arthurt1johnso.. on Aug 16 at 11:43 AM


  (Source: telegraph.co.uk)
At that time, Cote will decide if Apple has to pay as much as hundreds of millions of dollars in response to the recent ebooks ruling

Apple may have to go to trial (again) concerning the eBooks conspiracy, but this time, it's to discuss damages.

According to a new report by Reuters, U.S. District Judge Denise Cote scheduled a trial for damages in May 2014. At that time, Cote will decide if Apple has to pay as much as hundreds of millions of dollars in response to the recent eBooks ruling. 

Until then, Apple and the government have to complete interviews with experts by December 13. They must also submit court papers on whether to certify a class of plaintiffs. 

Earlier this month, the U.S. Department of Justice and 33 U.S. states and territories have proposed that Apple be banned from entering anti-competitive e-book distribution contracts for five years; end its business models with the five publishers it conspired with; use an outside monitor to make sure that its antitrust policies are effective, and allow retailers like Amazon and Barnes & Noble to provide links to their options for two years.

However, the five book publishers that took part in an agency price model with Apple (and were targeted in the DOJ investigation as well) said that the new solutions punish the publishers more than they do Apple. 
 
More specifically, they said that the restrictions on Apple go against the previous settlements between the publishers and the DOJ, where the publishers have already paid $166 million to benefit consumers. 

These solutions still have to be approved by Cote. 

This all started in April 2012, when the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) sued Apple and the five book publishers for using an agency pricing model in their agreements. This means that publishers were allowed to set the price of a book and Apple would take a 30 percent cut. In addition, the publishers could not let rivals sell the same book at a lower price.

Last month, Apple -- which was the only company to go to trial regarding eBooks while the book publishers had already settled with the DOJ -- was found guilty of conspiring to raise eBook prices. U.S. District Judge Denise Cote handed down the ruling, saying that consumers and competitors were negatively affected by the arrangement Apple had with the book publishers. 

Source: Reuters





Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Apple in court again?
By retrospooty on 8/15/2013 10:19:17 AM , Rating: 2
I wonder if Apple's execs are as tired of it as the rest of us are. Enough already.




RE: Apple in court again?
By bug77 on 8/15/2013 10:28:51 AM , Rating: 3
Why would they be tired? They still have to collect those $2B from Samsung which will let them pay the "hundreds of millions" for fixing ebook prices and still make a profit.
Plus, with enough drones to put the right spin on anything, this doubles as publicity for them.


RE: Apple in court again?
By Monkey's Uncle on 8/15/2013 10:48:39 AM , Rating: 5
I doubt it.

Litigation has been a major part of Apple's business model since the first Macs hit the scene and they closed up their architecture.

However they are not only dishing out the legal stew, as you can see they are having to eat it themselves too. At least until until their political pals step in and overturns any legal decisions.

It sure is nice to have friends in high places ;)

It's all part of the patent game.


RE: Apple in court again?
By retrospooty on 8/15/2013 11:21:26 AM , Rating: 2
"Litigation has been a major part of Apple's business model since the first Macs hit the scene and they closed up their architecture."

I know... Just tired of it.


RE: Apple in court again?
By Motoman on 8/15/2013 12:19:20 PM , Rating: 4
The judge should just burn them down. Enough with such corporations flagrantly violating the law whenever they want, and getting what amounts to a slap on the wrist.

Fine them for half their market cap, and put everyone with "Officer" in their title in jail for a year.

That would take care of this issue nicely.


RE: Apple in court again?
By retrospooty on 8/15/2013 1:37:25 PM , Rating: 2
I like it. Or at least the fine part. How about this, any violation of the law with the goal of artificially increasing profits, should garner a fine of no less than 10x the estimated profit illegally taken (more of the Judge deems fit).


RE: Apple in court again?
By Reclaimer77 on 8/15/2013 3:17:02 PM , Rating: 1
That sounds exactly like what they do in Italy.

You may have noticed, Italy isn't exactly a powerhouse of electronic innovation or industrial might.

Part of me would love if what you're suggesting happened to Apple. But deep down you have to know your idea would cripple our economy, just like Italy's.

Also you may have noticed, but we have the highest percentage of our population locked away in prisons of any nation on Earth. Certainly the highest in developed nations.

Now you want to throw vast swaths of people in jail arbitrarily...just..no. Or fine them out of existence.

Do you have some sort of impulse control issue? Every time you perceive an issue, your "fix" is to just decimate everyone or everything involved without prejudice. Killing an ant with an atom bomb, and pretend they'll be no fallout.


RE: Apple in court again?
By Monkey's Uncle on 8/15/2013 6:46:45 PM , Rating: 2
Corporations are adaptable beasties. If just Italy does this, the cure is simple - don't do your business in Italy (small loss compared to the larger picture).

But, if everybody does it, that is when the legal magic happens. Corporations would have no choice but to adapt or die. Corporations aren't as stupid as they look. They will have to innovate or die - as it should be.


RE: Apple in court again?
By Samus on 8/15/2013 10:53:46 AM , Rating: 2
Then they should stop making themselves a target.


RE: Apple in court again?
By rs2 on 8/15/2013 7:30:25 PM , Rating: 2
Apple should get hit with treble damages for its arrogance.


HUH?
By bah12 on 8/15/2013 5:42:33 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
...the U.S. Department of Justice and 33 U.S. states and territories have proposed that Apple be banned from entering anti-competitive e-book distribution contracts for five years
I thought by US law they were banned forever from entering anticompetitive contracts. I isn't being anticompetitive illegal, I thought that was the whole point of the suit. If so then why the 5 year provision, unless it means they cannot engage in any contracts for 5 years. This is the 2nd DT article where this wording was repeated, so I'm just seeking clarification as it seems confusing.




arthurt1johnson
By arthurt1johnson on 8/16/2013 11:43:43 AM , Rating: 1
my classmate's ex-wife makes $61 every hour on the laptop. She has been laid off for 5 months but last month her check was $20545 just working on the laptop for a few hours. Read more here work25com




"And boy have we patented it!" -- Steve Jobs, Macworld 2007













botimage
Copyright 2015 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki