Legal Experts Suggest Justice Department Unlikely to Win Antitrust Suit Against Apple

In the wake of yesterday's announcement that the U.S. Department of Justice has filed an antitrust lawsuit against Apple and a number of book publishers over alleged price fixing, CNET notes that the government may have a hard time winning its case against Apple. The publishers may, however, find themselves on the losing end of the case should they be unwilling to settle.

"It's a harder case against Apple than the publishers," says Geoffrey Manne, who teaches antitrust law at the Lewis and Clark Law School in Oregon and runs the International Center for Law and Economics.

One reason lies in the Justice Department's 36-page complaint, which recounts how publishers met over breakfast in a London hotel and dinners at Manhattan's posh Picholine restaurant, which boasts a "Best of Award of Excellence" from Wine Spectator magazine. The key point is that Apple wasn't present.

But even the case against the publishers is not a sure thing for the Department of Justice. Some experts suggest that even amid claims that the publishers met to discuss a shift to an agency model being championed by Apple, the publishers may not be found guilty of antitrust violations.

Specifically, the Supreme Court has ruled in the past that pricing arrangements among competitors are not automatically considered to be violations of antitrust law, and that the setting of minimum retail pricing by manufacturers is a permitted policy.

ibooks ipad hand
Several of the publishers involved in the lawsuit have already settled, but Macmillan and Penguin are holding out along with Apple to fight the case. Almost immediately following the filing of the Department of Justice's lawsuit, a number of states filed their own claims against the companies, citing customer overcharges of over $100 million since the move to an agency model of pricing. Regulators in other countries are also reportedly looking at whether they wish to take action on the matter.

Popular Stories

Apple Announces Special Event in New York Feature

Apple Announces Special Event in New York, London, and Shanghai on March 4

Monday February 16, 2026 6:05 am PST by
Apple today announced a "special Apple Experience" in New York, London, and Shanghai, taking place on March 4, 2026 at 9:00am ET. Apple invited select members of the media to the event in three major cities around the world. It is simply described as a "special Apple Experience," and there is no further information about what it may entail. The invitation features a 3D Apple logo design...
M3 iPad Air

Apple's Next Two Products Are Coming Soon

Thursday February 12, 2026 11:17 am PST by
Apple plans to release an iPhone 17e and an iPad Air with an M4 chip "in the coming weeks," according to the latest word from Bloomberg's Mark Gurman. "Apple retail employees say that inventory of the iPhone 16e has basically dried out and the iPad Air is seeing shortages as well," said Gurman. "I've been expecting new versions of both (iPhone 17e and M4 iPad Air) in the coming weeks."...
iphone 17 pro dark blue 1

Gurman: iPhone 18 Pro Could Be Underwhelming

Monday February 16, 2026 4:24 am PST by
Apple's upcoming iPhone 18 Pro and iPhone 18 Pro Max models "won't be a big update," according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman. In the latest edition of his "Power On" newsletter, Gurman said that the iPhone 18 Pro models will "represent minor tweaks from last year's iPhone 17 Pro and 17 Pro Max." He compared the upgrade to Apple's past practice of appending the letter "S" to its more minor...
Coffee Burgundy and Purple iPhone 18 Pro Mock

Five iPhone 18 Pro Features Revealed in New Report

Friday February 13, 2026 8:43 am PST by
While the iPhone 18 Pro and iPhone 18 Pro Max are still seven months away, an analyst has revealed five new features the devices will allegedly have. Rumored color options for the iPhone 18 Pro models In a research note with investment firm GF Securities on Thursday, analyst Jeff Pu outlined the following upgrades for the iPhone 18 Pro models: Smaller Dynamic Island: It has been rumored...
Apple Announces Special Event in New York Feature 1

Apple Event on March 4: Here's What to Expect

Tuesday February 17, 2026 8:08 am PST by
Apple on Monday invited selected journalists and content creators to a "special Apple Experience" on Wednesday, March 4 in New York, London, and Shanghai. At an Apple Experience, attendees are typically given the opportunity to try out Apple's latest hardware or software. Following the launch of Apple Creator Studio last month, for example, some content creators attended an Apple Experience...

Top Rated Comments

diamond.g Avatar
181 months ago
So they weren't even present, and the publishers control the price? Umm.... why is Apple being sued again?

I thought it was due to the "Most Favored Nation" clause?
Score: 8 Votes (Like | Disagree)
181 months ago
So they weren't even present, and the publishers control the price? Umm.... why is Apple being sued again?
Apple is being sued because it has agreements with the publishers who are accused of trying to use the agency model to allegedly price fix and is therefore considered complicit in the act. Apple is in effect "aiding and abetting" the alleged price fixing in the government's eyes by providing a vehicle through which the publishers can price fix.
Score: 7 Votes (Like | Disagree)
spiderman0616 Avatar
181 months ago
If Apple or the other publishers lose this battle, you are going to see Amazon being turned into the Walmart of e books. They can just undercut like crazy until everyone else shrivels and dies. It's suing one problem and protecting a whole other problem.

I personally like the agency model because it actually supports the industry. I'm not defending Apple's methods, because I still don't know if they're guilty of anything illegal or not, but I'm just saying that I'm not in favor of paying less for something if in turn it kills the company providing the content to me.
Score: 7 Votes (Like | Disagree)
IJ Reilly Avatar
181 months ago
The MFN clause itself is not a problem. The DOJ was alleging that Apple participated in a conspiracy to engage in price fixing. If they participated in a meeting where they and the publishers discussed a strategy to engage in price fixing, that could be a problem.

However, it would not be a problem if Apple simply individually negotiated terms with each publisher, even if the publishers told Apple what other deals they received, or if Apple told the publishers what other publishers were willing to accept. Unilateral action is OK, and revealing other deals is a legitimate attempt to gain leverage. That's the crux of Apple's defense in the separate class action lawsuit.

QFT. The CNET article is heavily spun, which is not surprising considering who wrote it. Legal analysts are going to be all over the map at this point, if only because they've seen only the government's complaint, not Apple's or the publisher's responses. But if you quote libertarian think tanks you are going to get predicable results.

Obviously it's the publishers who are at the pointiest end of the stick, but I don't think Apple needs to have been present at any meetings to be found a party to price fixing. It's going to be difficult to claim that all of these publishers came to the same terms with Apple by mere coincidence. The one quoted email from Jobs pretty much refutes that theory anyway.

All antitrust cases are difficult for the government to prosecute. Citing the DoJ's failures in recent history isn't telling close to the whole story, since most of these cases never make it to trial. They are overwhelming settled out of court by consent decrees, in which the government typically gets at least some of the changes they are seeking. Mr. McCullagh doesn't share that little factoid with us because it doesn't make the government look blithering.
Score: 6 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Amazing Iceman Avatar
181 months ago
Another waste of taxpayer dollars... :rolleyes:

Yep. The DOJ should be more concerned about regulating the price of gasoline and food, so we the consumers don't have to keep paying those outrageous prices. People can choose to buy or not to buy a book, but people have no other choice than to buy gas and food.

What happened to paying under $1 per gallon?
Score: 5 Votes (Like | Disagree)
181 months ago
They essentially killed book stores buy undercutting them so there are few left, and did the same to ebooks with 90% of the market because they were selling below cost.

Amazon didn't kill the small book stores. Barnes & Noble and Borders did. Amazon then killed Barnes & Noble and Borders.
Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)