backtop


Print 23 comment(s) - last by wallijonn.. on Feb 12 at 11:12 AM

Apple's attempt at escaping the consequences has failed

Apple was unsuccessful in getting rid of its external eBooks monitor, but the tech giant was at least able to get him to tone his behavior down a bit (via the court, of course). 
 
According to a new report from Reuters, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York said that Apple's external eBooks monitor -- Michael Bromwich -- will not be put on hold as Apple requested. 
 
Bromwich will, however, have to cut back on his methods of monitoring. According to the court, Bromwich is limited to assessing Apple's compliance policies and its efforts to pass those policies along to its workers effectively. This means he cannot investigate whether Apple employees are actually complying with antitrust laws or not. 
 
Last month, Apple said Bromwich is too "intrusive" and could interfere with Apple's ability to create new products, adding that he aggressively sought interviews with top executives and attempted to reach company documents that were outside of his duties. 
 
Apple also said that Bromwich is charging Apple far too much for his services -- about $1,100 per hour to be exact.
 


Michael Bromwich [SOURCE: cir.ca]

The tech company requested a hearing regarding putting Bromwich's duties on hold until Apple is ready with a formal appeal, but it looks like that isn't happening. However, Apple is still preparing a formal appeal, but will have to continue dealing with Bromwich in the meantime. 

Bromwich was sent to Apple as a monitor due to a court ruling last July that found Apple guilty of conspiring to raise e-book 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 five book publishers. The publishers were Hachette Livre (Lagardère Publishing France), Harper Collins (News Corp., U.S.A.), Simon & Schuster (CBS Corp., U.S.A.), Penguin (Pearson Group, United Kingdom) and Verlagsgruppe Georg von Holzbrinck (owner of inter alia Macmillan, Germany).

Judge Cote sees Apple's complaints as further reason for having the external monitor in place. In other words, Apple is mad that it was caught acting out-of-line, and doesn't want to pay the consequences. 

"If anything, Apple's reaction to the existence of a monitorship underscores the wisdom of its imposition," said Judge Cote.

Source: Reuters



Comments     Threshold


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

Just got to put this in perspective
By Varun on 2/11/2014 11:38:40 AM , Rating: 5
$1100/hour is too much.

Apple made (Net income) just over $37 Billion in FY 2013. That means they made (remember this is net so after all expenses) $4,227,968 per hour, 24 hours a day, for the entire year.

So now unfortunately they are only going to make $4,226,868 per hour.

Somehow I don't feel sad for them especially since they were convicted of colluding to raise prices and that's directly affected me, and I don't make $4 million dollars an hour.




By Varun on 2/11/2014 11:43:13 AM , Rating: 2
Oh and of course the lawyer will only be billing them for time spent there, which likely will be far less than the 8760 hours in a year.


RE: Just got to put this in perspective
By carniver on 2/11/2014 11:59:11 AM , Rating: 2
$1100/hr isn't much. However, paying $1100/hr to someone who restlessly seek to take away your profits, that's definitely too much for Apple!


RE: Just got to put this in perspective
By amanojaku on 2/11/2014 1:02:00 PM , Rating: 3
Taking away Apple's profits?!? Apple would not have made so much money if it hadn't rigged the system! That's the whole point of this case!


RE: Just got to put this in perspective
By dgingerich on 2/11/2014 2:38:07 PM , Rating: 2
What I believe he meant to say was that the monitor was getting in the way of Apple making its profits in the usual manner.


RE: Just got to put this in perspective
By amanojaku on 2/11/2014 3:11:19 PM , Rating: 2
So, you're saying one individual is responsible for a potential loss of business for the entire company? Nonsense. First of all, he's a monitor; he doesn't have the ability to make business decisions. Secondly, the only way he could be disruptive would be to take up people's time. And if you read the court filings, he asked people when they could be available, and they rebuffed him. By law, they had to make themselves available at some point. Thirdly, Apple continued its sales trends during the period the monitor was there. Unit sales and profits were pretty much in line with previous years, or even better. Just ask Tony Swash.


By inteli722 on 2/11/2014 5:16:30 PM , Rating: 3
What he was saying was obviously hyperbolic and sarcastic.

By making money "in their usual manner" was poking fun at the case, referring to the fact that they were price fixing.

you can't seriously be so thick as to not see that.


RE: Just got to put this in perspective
By Reclaimer77 on 2/11/2014 1:41:22 PM , Rating: 2
How is he seeking to take away profits? Illegally gained profits, perhaps, Which is the whole point of him being there.

If Apple can't comply with the law and put up with ONE guy, maybe it's time to really punish them. I've never seen such an arrogant and obnoxious corporate entity in my life.

Their reaction to this is just making it harder on them, but they seem oblivious that the world doesn't revolved around them. Can a Corporation be a narcissist? I thin it can!


RE: Just got to put this in perspective
By retrospooty on 2/11/2014 5:05:09 PM , Rating: 2
"If Apple can't comply with the law and put up with ONE guy, maybe it's time to really punish them. I've never seen such an arrogant and obnoxious corporate entity in my life.

Their reaction to this is just making it harder on them, but they seem oblivious that the world doesn't revolved around them. Can a Corporation be a narcissist? I thin it can!"


Honestly, if Apple didn't exist, and you asked that same question, I would have said no, and I would have thought that you had issues to even think such nonsense... But Apple has proven time and time again that it is arrogant, obnoxious and narcissistic. You are absolutely right.


RE: Just got to put this in perspective
By tonyswash on 2/11/14, Rating: -1
By retrospooty on 2/11/2014 5:21:18 PM , Rating: 2
Really? You don't see it? Imagine that, the hugest Apple fan I have ever seen doesn't see that Apple can be arrogant, obnoxious and narcissistic.

OK, lets see... The whole Mac v PC campaign, and lets not forget, "Your holding it wrong" " Narcissistic - The above issue, and The concept of blatantly copying from other companies and then suing when they are copied - and many many more examples I know you have heard (and defended) before.

Ya, it must just be me being childish.



By Cheesew1z69 on 2/11/2014 5:24:02 PM , Rating: 2
That is being childish? Does the truth hurt Tony?


By NAVAIR on 2/11/2014 1:15:46 PM , Rating: 1
That's a far left outlook.


By Scott66 on 2/11/2014 5:14:19 PM , Rating: 2
$1,100 is OK, what is amazing is the monitor is so out of his depth, he had to hire an expert at an additional $1,200 to do his job.


Wassamatta Apple?
By retrospooty on 2/11/2014 11:35:59 AM , Rating: 3
The courts aren't so great when they rule against you? Awe... The gods of kharma are weeping rivers for you. :P




RE: Wassamatta Apple?
By tonyswash on 2/11/14, Rating: -1
RE: Wassamatta Apple?
By retrospooty on 2/11/2014 2:42:23 PM , Rating: 2
Only you would see any of that as a positive. The only positive, is that it doesn't hurt Apple in the long run as they are insanely profitable... But nothing about this was positive, Apple got caught illegally manipulating prices and got smacked down.


RE: Wassamatta Apple?
By tonyswash on 2/11/2014 5:09:56 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
But nothing about this was positive,


Let’s see.

The court appointed monitor arrives at Apple and says he wants to look at everything, all aspects of Apple’s activities, read any document he wants, monitor anything that takes his interest.

Apple says no - you were appointed to oversee just a training program and refuses his requests.

They go to court to resolve the matter.

The court decides that the monitor is just restricted to narrowly overseeing a training program.

Hard to see how that’s a loss for Apple.


RE: Wassamatta Apple?
By retrospooty on 2/11/2014 5:36:49 PM , Rating: 2
I was referring to the illegal price fixing case they lost.


Apple needs to be monitored
By flatrock on 2/11/2014 2:17:42 PM , Rating: 2
Apple needs to be monitored and I think the monitor should be able to check if Apple is following the ruling properly, but perhaps it makes more sense to make sure the message is being communicated to employees and after a few months check periodically for compliance.

However $1100/hour is absurd. I see absolutely no reason why they can't find a competent person to do the monitoring for half that or less.




RE: Apple needs to be monitored
By Reclaimer77 on 2/11/2014 5:10:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
However $1100/hour is absurd.


*cough* sorry guys, I just can't help myself with this one. Okay, here goes...

Hey it's not like good Jews just grow on trees!!!

*rimshot*

OOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!11!!!!1!!!


"Outside of his duties"?
By wallijonn on 2/12/2014 11:12:38 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
he aggressively sought interviews with top executives and attempted to reach company documents that were outside of his duties.


Translation: they fear what else he may find.




Wow
By brshoemak on 2/11/2014 3:31:17 PM , Rating: 2
So basically, to keep the monitor happy all Apple just has to do is write up their policies in a document and send it out as an attachment with the subject line of "Read This"

This is supposed to be a punishment in what way again?

That's like me asking my daughter, when it's time to go to bed, if she brushed her teeth and believing whatever she says.




"We can't expect users to use common sense. That would eliminate the need for all sorts of legislation, committees, oversight and lawyers." -- Christopher Jennings














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki