External Compliance Monitor: Apple is Blocking Interviews, Disrupting E-Book Antitrust Investigation [Updated]

iBooks Michael Bromwich, the external compliance monitor assigned to Apple as a result of its e-book antitrust case, has filed papers in a U.S. District Court accusing the company of being uncooperative and obstructive in his investigation, reports The Wall Street Journal.

The lawyer stated that Apple characterized his team's activities as a “roving investigation“ with no worthwhile purpose, even going on to say that individuals within the company purposely blocked him from interviewing top-level officials and senior executives.

On Monday, Mr. Bromwich said he routinely met with top management at the three organizations he previously monitored and had "never before had a request for a meeting or interview in a monitoring assignment rejected or even deferred."

"This is far less access than I have ever received during a comparable period of time in the three other monitorships I have conducted," Mr. Bromwich said.

According to the emails filed by Mr. Bromwich, his relationship with Apple was rocky from the start. After Mr. Bromwich sent Kyle Andeer, Apple's director of competition law, an email detailing his rates and the contours of his oversight, the wide gaps between the two party's expectations came into focus.

The news follows a formal complaint filed by Apple last month over Bromwich's handling of the case, stating that the lawyer charged exorbitant fees that the company was unhappy with. Following two weeks of work, Bromwich sent Apple an invoice of $138,432, which the company described as "unprecedented in its experience." Apple also spoke out against Bromwich's requests for interviews with high level officials, stating that the lawyer was overstepping his bounds.

In July, Apple was found guilty of of conspiring with five publishers to raise the retail price of e-books, following a lawsuit brought by the United States Department of Justice. As a result of its punishment, Apple was ordered to hire an external compliance monitor to ensure that the company complies with all antitrust requirements in the future.

Apple also continues to deny that it engaged in price fixing and filed a notice in October to appeal the case, with the company likely to submit its formal arguments in early 2014.

Update: The Justice Department has urged Judge Denise Cote to reject Apple's requests and that the attacks on Bromwich "only highlight the critical need for his monitorship to continue uninterrupted", saying the company was looking to "shield its highest-level executives and board members from the perceived inconvenience" of meeting with the court monitor.

Popular Stories

iPhone SE 4 Vertical Camera Feature

iPhone SE 4 Production Will Reportedly Begin Ramping Up in October

Tuesday July 23, 2024 2:00 pm PDT by
Following nearly two years of rumors about a fourth-generation iPhone SE, The Information today reported that Apple suppliers are finally planning to begin ramping up mass production of the device in October of this year. If accurate, that timeframe would mean that the next iPhone SE would not be announced alongside the iPhone 16 series in September, as expected. Instead, the report...
iPhone 17 Plus Feature

iPhone 17 Lineup Specs Detail Display Upgrade and New High-End Model

Monday July 22, 2024 4:33 am PDT by
Key details about the overall specifications of the iPhone 17 lineup have been shared by the leaker known as "Ice Universe," clarifying several important aspects of next year's devices. Reports in recent months have converged in agreement that Apple will discontinue the "Plus" iPhone model in 2025 while introducing an all-new iPhone 17 "Slim" model as an even more high-end option sitting...
Generic iPhone 17 Feature With Full Width Dynamic Island

Kuo: Ultra-Thin iPhone 17 to Feature A19 Chip, Single Rear Camera, Semi-Titanium Frame, and More

Wednesday July 24, 2024 9:06 am PDT by
Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo today shared alleged specifications for a new ultra-thin iPhone 17 model rumored to launch next year. Kuo expects the device to be equipped with a 6.6-inch display with a current-size Dynamic Island, a standard A19 chip rather than an A19 Pro chip, a single rear camera, and an Apple-designed 5G chip. He also expects the device to have a...
iPhone 16 Pro Sizes Feature

iPhone 16 Series Is Less Than Two Months Away: Everything We Know

Thursday July 25, 2024 5:43 am PDT by
Apple typically releases its new iPhone series around mid-September, which means we are about two months out from the launch of the iPhone 16. Like the iPhone 15 series, this year's lineup is expected to stick with four models – iPhone 16, iPhone 16 Plus, iPhone 16 Pro, and iPhone 16 Pro Max – although there are plenty of design differences and new features to take into account. To bring ...
icloud private relay outage

iCloud Private Relay Experiencing Outage

Thursday July 25, 2024 3:18 pm PDT by
Apple’s iCloud Private Relay service is down for some users, according to Apple’s System Status page. Apple says that the iCloud Private Relay service may be slow or unavailable. The outage started at 2:34 p.m. Eastern Time, but it does not appear to be affecting all iCloud users. Some impacted users are unable to browse the web without turning iCloud Private Relay off, while others are...

Top Rated Comments

KPOM Avatar
138 months ago
More important things to do than comply with something they have been ordered to do as a result of a court case?

Apple is not above the law.

Neither is Bromwich. He had a specific remit to monitor compliance, and not to conduct a witch hunt at $1025-$1100/hr. He sounds like someone who is used to getting his way and sees Apple as a gravy train.

He's a former DOJ attorney who is now raking it in as a "contractor," using his connections with the judge (who seemingly was biased and has a great chance of being slapped down by the appellate court).
Score: 20 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Small White Car Avatar
138 months ago
And y'all say Samsung are sly buggers. Apple are just as bad.
Like it or not, Apple has to comply and it they don't they'll be on the losing end of a judgement to force them to do so.
Did you read Apple's complaint against him?

I find it hard to believe anyone can think Apple is in the wrong here once you've read what this guy's been asking for.
Score: 17 Votes (Like | Disagree)
gnasher729 Avatar
138 months ago
Apple also continues to deny that it engaged in price fixing and filed a notice in October to appeal the case, with the company likely to submit its formal arguments in early 2014.

I wonder who is paying for this "compliance monitoring" when Apple's appeal is successful. Here is theregister's take on the situation:

"The biggest negative in 2013 was the bizarre decision from Judge Cote in the ebooks price-fixing case, which handed Amazon a retail monopoly: permitting it to sell books at below cost, while tying Apple's hands. Bizarre, because harm wasn't demonstrated - prices across the market continued to fall - and the long-term consequence is a less competitive book industry. Expect it to look much more like Hollywood each year. And not in a good way".
Score: 15 Votes (Like | Disagree)
DipDog3 Avatar
138 months ago
Bromwich sounds like a crybaby. Apple executives have more important things to do than interview with someone who is overseeing iBooks. I doubt iBooks even shows up as a blip on the revenue stream.
Score: 14 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Small White Car Avatar
138 months ago
And what law is he breaking?
Well, for one, the secret meetings he's had with the judge are against the rules.

The judge has both said that the meetings aren't happening and then that they'll promise not to do them in the future, which is an odd thing to say if they never intended to do them.

And I know there's no law against demanding to meet Jony Ive and Al Gore, but it sure a hell makes me think this guy is going WAY outside the scope of his assignment. Or does that seem normal to you?
Score: 12 Votes (Like | Disagree)
waldobushman Avatar
138 months ago
Before an opinion should be made, one needs to parse the actual order regarding the monitor's charge. Monitor's are not allowed to run the company, or second guess management.

So, Apple's argument would be he is overstepping his assignment and attempting to interfere with management.
Score: 11 Votes (Like | Disagree)