iBooksApple today requested that U.S. District Judge Denise Cote disqualify Michael Bromwich, the external compliance monitor Apple was ordered to hire to ensure the company complies with all antitrust requirements in the future, from serving in his position, reports Reuters.

An attorney for the consumer technology giant on Tuesday asked U.S. District Judge Denise Cote in Manhattan to disqualify Michael Bromwich from serving as an external compliance monitor, arguing he had shown a personal bias against the company.

In a letter to Cote, Apple's attorney claimed the report filed by Bromwich last month, in which he accused Apple of blocking interviews and disrupting his investigation, was a "wholly inappropriate declaration".

Bromwich's report was filed in reaction to a complaint Apple had filed in November, in which the company claimed Bromwich was overcharging them for his services. In addition, Apple cited Bromwich had aggressively sought to interview top executives when his mandate required him to assess the company's antitrust policies 90 days after his appointment.

Those same complaints were re-asserted in Apple's letter to Cote requesting the removal of Bromwich. Apple was found guilty of conspiring with five publishers to raise the prices of e-books in July.

Top Rated Comments

Mak47 Avatar
102 months ago
Based on Apple's documented complaints about this guy, and his own letter in defense of himself, Apple is absolutely in the right to request his removal. They're not objecting to having a compliance monitor as ordered by the court, they're objecting to having this one.

The monitor has no right to investigate the company on a wider scale than was ordered by the court. He has no legitimate reason to meet with people like Jony Ive. He has no right to meet with employees of the company without legal representation. To top all of that, he has a long-time personal relationship with the judge in the case. That alone is a clear conflict.

They're also appealing the ruling entirely. So not only is it not in their interest to have someone inside the company gathering information that will benefit their opponent in court--there is a question of constitutionality at play. Apple should not be required to incriminate itself or open itself to further intrusive investigations. The appeal should be based on the original case and evidence at hand.

As for Apple engaging in illegal activity before this...that's questionable at best. Having followed the case closely and seen the evidence presented by the prosecution, I saw nothing that indicated that was the case.

What I saw was a judge that was inclined from the start to find them guilty. Despite records of meetings, emails and phone calls that didn't at all indicate an ongoing or long-term conspiracy, that's exactly what happened.

Apple (or any company) has a right to engage in competitive business practices. Even if those practices are aggressive or damage the income of their competitors. Content creators have the right to charge whatever they please for their content--even if it had previously been offered for less.

The one piece of evidence that seems to have hurt them was a draft email from Steve Jobs indicating that his desire was to raise the price of ebooks so that Apple could compete against the likes of Amazon. The problem is that this was a draft email. It was never sent. If having a personal desire to beat your competitors in business is a crime, or to think up potentially bad ideas to do so is a crime, then we'd have to lock up every business owner in the country.

It is quite clear to me that Apple was targeted by the DOJ (and multiple states) as an easy target. They assumed that like the publishers, Apple would just cave in, pay their shakedown money and the DOJ would get to claim a "Pro-consumer" victory. They're now being punished for not being obedient. This follows a long history of Apple not playing the corporate lobbying (bribery) game and came on the heels of Apple embarrassing the congressional committee that attacked them over their completely legal tax practices.
Score: 15 Votes (Like | Disagree)
gnasher729 Avatar
102 months ago
Compared to what? Do you know the correct fees for this type of work?
First, his fees are high considering that he is paying someone else who actually knows how to do the job and adds his fees as well.

Second, his fees are high considering that he uses an external company who charges 15% of his fees and his underlings fees to send the bill to Apple, which he also charges Apple.

Third, his fees are high considering there is nothing to monitor yet, but he is trying to interview everyone at Apple, interfering with Apple's business, trying to rack up more billable hours.

----------

What qualifications do you have to come to your opinion? Are you lawyer?
Common sense. There is a monopoly in the e-book market, and that monopoly is Amazon. When Amazon got competition that threatened to break that monopoly, they ran to the courts, and this judge then restored Amazon's monopoly.

----------

If I was getting paid $1100 per hour I'd demand to visit the new campus so I could watch the paint dry.
For half of that, I'd watch you watching the paint dry :D
And then you'd have your company charge 15% of that for sending the bill to Apple.
Score: 9 Votes (Like | Disagree)
thaifood Avatar
102 months ago
If they remove Bromwich they should get another external monitor as to complie with the court order. Those fees were extremely overpriced. The fact that he needed to sub-contract someone else because he wasn't familiar with antitrust law for the exact purpose he was hired for is just ridiculous!

He probably is good mates with the judge and thus got thrown a big name company to work on. Typical government benefits.
Score: 8 Votes (Like | Disagree)
mw360 Avatar
102 months ago
If I was getting paid $1100 per hour I'd demand to visit the new campus so I could watch the paint dry.
Score: 6 Votes (Like | Disagree)
giantfan1224 Avatar
102 months ago
You should have stopped there.

All these armchair lawyers are hilarious....
Are you saying the procedure for this request would not allow for her to recuse herself? What I'm saying is she should recuse herself if procedure for such a request would be appropriate. How is that being an "armchair lawyer"? Please enlighten me...
Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)
charlituna Avatar
102 months ago
If they remove Bromwich they should get another external monitor as to complie with the court order. Those fees were extremely overpriced. The fact that he needed to sub-contract someone else because he wasn't familiar with antitrust law for the exact purpose he was hired for is just ridiculous!

This. And I suspect a big reason why Applei a crying foul.

Frankly Apple wants the whole monitor removed period. They feel it is way over the top. They are pushing to get the whole judgement reversed if possible.

But as a first step they want a monitor that isn't asking for crazy fees to support lawyers he shouldn't need (the monitor should be someone versed in antitrust law), and is playing by the rules. Including one that the monitor can't speak to anyone without their lawyer or Apple lawyers present and he has tried to force this. Which they refused and thus why they refused his meetings. Also he is there to monitor iBooks stuff and he's trying to stick into things that aren't even slightly connected. If it was iTunes related okay that isn't so bad. But this is stuff way out on another field and Apple won't have that and shouldn't have to.

So a new monitor that doesn't need his own hired crew, a firm pay rate and firmer rules about what the monitor can and can't do. That's the first step Apple is demanding. And to me it all seems very reasonable

----------



The big question is IF is he is being unethical etc. Just because Apple wants to complain doesn't mean it is so.

If he's violating specific court orders like denying folks the right to have a lawyer present when that right was listed in the judgement, then yeah that probably breaks some kind of rule that would get him in trouble



Considering what they were doing to warrant this monitor to begin with was completely illegal doesn't make them very credible.

Actually Cote said several times that the MFN, the agency terms etc are all totally legal. And frankly many don't agree with her determination that Apple was part of any conspiracy to collude. Certainly it seems clear that the publishers did, just not that Apple was an active part in it and created it as the DOJ claimed. Time will tell when Apple is done if higher courts that didn't give their opinions before the trial started agree or disagree.

And whether those higher courts will step up and set rules that affect all players and not just the one with the big pockets. Amazon pulled some pretty anti competition moves in their hey day and not a peep. It's time to look at that and to prevent such crap in all digital markets by all players.
Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)

Related Stories

studio buds family

Beats Studio Buds Debuting Today With Active Noise Cancellation, Stemless Design, and More for $150

Monday June 14, 2021 8:00 am PDT by
We've seen a lot of teasers about the Beats Studio Buds over the past month since they first showed up in Apple's beta software updates, and today they're finally official. The Beats Studio Buds are available to order today in red, white, and black ahead of a June 24 ship date, and they're priced at $149.99. The Studio Buds are the first Beats-branded earbuds to truly compete with AirPods...
youtube apple tv

YouTube Discontinuing 3rd-Generation Apple TV App, AirPlay Still Available

Wednesday February 3, 2021 3:09 pm PST by
YouTube is planning to stop supporting its YouTube app on the third-generation Apple TV models, where YouTube has long been available as a channel option. A 9to5Mac reader received a message about the upcoming app discontinuation, which is set to take place in March.Starting early March, the YouTube app will no longer be available on Apple TV (3rd generation). You can still watch YouTube on...
gradiente iphone white

Brazilian Electronics Company Revives Long-Running iPhone Trademark Dispute

Tuesday May 19, 2020 1:06 pm PDT by
Apple has been involved in a long-running iPhone trademark dispute in Brazil, which was revived today by IGB Electronica, a Brazilian consumer electronics company that originally registered the "iPhone" name in 2000. IGB Electronica fought a multi-year battle with Apple in an attempt to get exclusive rights to the "iPhone" trademark, but ultimately lost, and now the case has been brought to...
YouTube Picture in Picture Feature

YouTube Premium Subscribers Can Now Use iOS Picture-in-Picture: Here's How

Wednesday August 25, 2021 3:55 am PDT by
Google has rolled out picture-in-picture support as an "experimental" feature for YouTube premium subscribers, allowing them to watch video in a small window when the app is closed. If you're a premium YouTube subscriber looking to try out picture-in-picture, follow these steps: Launch a web browser and sign into your YouTube account at YouTube.com. Navigate to www.youtube.com/new. Scroll...
apple privacy

Apple Publishes FAQ to Address Concerns About CSAM Detection and Messages Scanning

Monday August 9, 2021 1:50 am PDT by
Apple has published a FAQ titled "Expanded Protections for Children" which aims to allay users' privacy concerns about the new CSAM detection in iCloud Photos and communication safety for Messages features that the company announced last week. "Since we announced these features, many stakeholders including privacy organizations and child safety organizations have expressed their support of...
apple screen time screen icons

Persistent Kids Finding Loopholes in Apple's Screen Time Limits

Tuesday October 15, 2019 9:44 am PDT by
Apple is currently engaged in a cat-and-mouse game with persistent kids looking to circumvent Screen Time restrictions, but the company has been receiving some criticism for not moving quickly enough to lock down some of the loopholes, reports The Washington Post. A few of the loopholes and ways for parents to shut them down are documented on the site Protect Young Eyes, while these and...
2012macpro

Apple Outlines Metal-Capable Cards Compatible With macOS Mojave on 2010 and 2012 Mac Pro Models

Monday September 24, 2018 3:26 pm PDT by
Apple's new macOS Mojave update is not compatible with mid-2010 and mid-2012 Mac Pros with stock GPUs, but it is supported on 2010 and 2012 Mac Pro models that have been upgraded with graphics cards that support Metal. Apple today shared a new support document that provides a list of graphics cards that are Metal-capable, which will be useful for 2010 and 2012 Mac Pro owners who want to...
bluetti eb70 main

MacRumors Giveaway: Win a Bluetti EB70 Portable Power Station and 200W Solar Panel

Friday September 3, 2021 11:13 am PDT by
For this week's giveaway, we've teamed up with MAXOAK to offer MacRumors readers a chance to win a Bluetti portable power station and an accompanying solar panel. Bluetti makes a range of portable power station options that are useful for camping, emergencies, power outages, off-grid living, and similar situations. The Bluetti EB70 is a solid middle of the road option that offers 716Wh and...
anker lightning cable mfi

Unwrap a New Apple Device? Stock Up on Extra Certified Lightning Cables for as Little as $6

Monday December 25, 2017 5:45 am PST by
If you unwrapped an Apple product today it likely came with one of the company's first-party Lightning cables, but having an extra on hand is always a good idea, so you can place it in other rooms in your house, in your car, or in a bag when you travel. For that reason, now's a good time to shop for third-party Lightning cables that are cheaper than Apple's own accessory, but still Made For...
ipad pro 10 5

Apple Discontinues 10.5-Inch iPad Pro Following Launch of Lower-Priced 10.5-Inch iPad Air

Monday March 18, 2019 6:09 am PDT by
Apple has stopped selling the second-generation 10.5-inch iPad Pro, originally released in June 2017, after launching a new 10.5-inch iPad Air today. The 10.5-inch iPad Pro had remained available from $649 following the release of 11-inch and 12.9-inch iPad Pro models in October 2018, but it has been replaced by the 10.5-inch iPad Air with a cheaper starting price of $499. The new iPad...