EddycueEddy Cue, Apple's senior vice president in charge of internet software and services, took the stand today in the Department of Justice's antitrust case against Apple over the price of e-books following the launch of the iBooks Store in 2010.

Cue is Apple's chief negotiator and was in charge of all discussions with the major book publishing houses. The DoJ is alleging that Apple illegally worked with publishers to artificially increase e-book prices, a violation of U.S. antitrust laws.

In testimony today, Cue admitted that the prices of some e-books -- including many of those appearing on the New York Times best sellers list -- did rise after the iBooks Store was opened, but it was more the result of publishers being unhappy with Amazon's pricing of $9.99/book than anything untoward that Apple did.

Instead, Cue said that prices rose because publishers "expressed to us that they wanted higher prices". Apple's pricing model for e-books is the same agency model that it uses on the App Store -- publishers set book prices and Apple takes 30% of the revenue while returning 70% to the publishers.

He also said that he didn't know if publishers were working together on the negotiations with Apple and Amazon, but because all the publishers had issues with different parts of Apple's proposed contract Cue said that "if they talked together, I assumed it would be easier to get the deals done." Cue also said that he "wasn't trying to negotiate" for the entire e-book market and he wasn't attempting to fix issues the publishers had with Amazon.

Top Rated Comments

boomeringue Avatar
143 months ago
I still don't understand what Apple allegedly did wrong. They set up shop a charged a higher price?

It's illegal to collude in a monopolistic way to game a mature marketplace for more profit. If every airline were to get together and jointly decide to raise prices on a NY-LA route by $100, that's illegal.

The DOJ's argument is that Apple sat down with the 6 major book companies and colluded to raise prices on the ebook market. Their argument fails because a) it wasn't a mature marketplace, since the 'eBooks market' had been around only for a few years, and only had one main player (Amazon), who had like 90% of the market, and b) Amazon was selling many of their eBooks for far below the intended price for eBooks. In many cases, Amazon was selling eBooks on their store for at or below wholesale price, which they were doing essentially to keep pricing pressure on brick and mortar bookstores and eventually drive more of them out of business.

So essentially Amazon was the one using a monopoly to control prices. Funny how things work that way.
Score: 7 Votes (Like | Disagree)
GadgetDon Avatar
143 months ago


"So essentially Amazon was the one using a monopoly to control prices. Funny how things work that way. "

Only Amazon never had a monopoly.

Amazon controlled nearly all of the "best seller" ebook market (some niches had the publishers selling their own ebook), engaged in predatory pricing by discounting to near or below cost to ensure no other retailer could enter the market, and used their market power in physical books to threaten publishers who didn't play ball with them on eBooks.

As such, the ebook market was the Kindle market. You can argue that wasn't a monopoly, but Amazon controlled the market and was taking active steps to ensure that didn't change. And not only did the DoJ ignore this anti-competitive behavior, the state department gave Amazon a non-bid contract to provide ebooks and ebook readers because of that control.

And since you compared it to Apple's music - Apple never gave up their 30% margin so when the publishers were unhappy with Apple's control of the online music business and gave Amazon both non-DRMed music (which Apple had been asking for) and a lower price, Apple didn't go running to the DoJ screaming "collusion".

Now I will say that if there had been a deal struck between Apple and Amazon, Apple gets music and Amazon gets books, that WOULD have been collusion and Apple would have been in deep trouble for it (and maybe Amazon would FINALLY have taken a step the DoJ couldn't ignore).
Score: 5 Votes (Like | Disagree)
NoNothing Avatar
143 months ago
This entire trial makes you wonder who at Amazon bribed whom at the DOJ.
Score: 5 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Plutonius Avatar
143 months ago
I can argue it wasn't a monopoly. I can also argue that Amazon has not been found guilty of anything illegal. Just like people can claim that Apple has not been found guilty of anything illegal.

Also - the issue is collusion. Not Monopolies.

Regardless of what marketshare Amazon had. That doesn't entitle other companies to collude. If that is what happened. TBD

In a trial, it's important to get all the background information to arrive at a correct decision. Amazon's actions at the time are 100% pertinent to the trial. If Amazon is found to have a monopoly on the ebook market during the period in question, it does affect what's considered collusion.
Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Tigger11 Avatar
143 months ago


Only Amazon never had a monopoly.

Amazon met every necessary requirement for a Monopoly in the ebook market before Apple entered the market, they were the source of over 90% of the ebooks at that time. How exactly do you think they were not a monopoly?
Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)
iGrip Avatar
143 months ago
I still don't understand what Apple allegedly did wrong. They set up shop a charged a higher price?
Not even close. But I suspect that you'd rather not know, and additionally, that any and all explanations that might be tendered would remain unaccepted.

But maybe I'm wrong and you really don't know. If so, here's (http://www.scribd.com/doc/145486131/U-S-v-Apple-Et-Al-Opening-Slides) a decent glimpse into what the DOJ is thinking in pursuing this action against Apple.
Score: 3 Votes (Like | Disagree)

Popular Stories

6chatgpt mac app

5 Reasons to Use OpenAI's ChatGPT App for Mac

Thursday May 23, 2024 6:07 am PDT by
On May 13, OpenAI during its Spring Update announced that it would be releasing a desktop ChatGPT app for the Mac in the "coming weeks," and said that ahead of a wider launch it had started rolling out the app to some ChatGPT Plus subscribers. Subscribe to the MacRumors YouTube channel for more videos. After testing the app for a few days, we thought it was worth sharing some reasons why...
new best buy blue

Best Buy's Memorial Day Sale Has Record Low Prices on iPads, MacBooks, and Much More

Friday May 24, 2024 7:12 am PDT by
Best Buy today kicked off its Memorial Day weekend sale, and it has some of the best prices we've tracked in weeks on iPads and MacBooks. Specifically, you'll find record low prices on the 5th generation iPad Air, iPad mini 6, M2 MacBook Air, and M3 MacBook Pro. Note: MacRumors is an affiliate partner with Best Buy. When you click a link and make a purchase, we may receive a small payment,...
macOS 15 Feature

macOS 15 System Settings to Get Design Overhaul

Thursday May 23, 2024 12:51 pm PDT by
With the macOS 15 update that is set to debut at WWDC in June, Apple plans to rearrange "menus and app UIs," according to a report from AppleInsider. The System Settings app, which was last updated with macOS Ventura, will get one of the biggest updates. With macOS Ventura, Apple renamed the System Preferences app to System Settings, introducing a design similar to the Settings app on the...
iPhone 16 Pro Max Generic Feature 2

5 Biggest Changes Rumored for iPhone 16 Pro Max

Tuesday May 21, 2024 7:29 am PDT by
Given Apple's rumored plan to add an all-new high-end tier to its iPhone 17 series in 2025, this could be the year for Apple to bring its boldest "Pro Max" model to the table — the kind of iPhone 16 upgrade that stands tall above its siblings, both figuratively and literally. If you have been holding out for the iPhone 16 Pro Max, here are five of the biggest changes rumored to be coming...