ibooks-iconLast year, Apple lost a monumental e-book antitrust case that alleged the company had colluded with publishers to raise the price of e-books. As a result, Apple was forced to submit to a cumbersome external antitrust monitor and the company agreed to pay out $450 million as part of a settlement with several class action lawyers and state district attorneys.

Throughout the lawsuit, Apple maintained its innocence, and in February, the company formally filed for an appeal, asking the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn the original ruling. In the appeal filing, Apple called the judge's decision a "radical departure" from modern antitrust law.

As of this week, Apple's case is being heard in appeals court, and it appears that things are going in the company's favor thus far. According to a report from Reuters, some of the judges "appeared sympathetic" to Apple's argument that its agreements with e-book publishers were "pro-competitive."

One of Apple's main arguments during the e-book antitrust case focused on Judge Cote's treatment of the company. Apple believes it was treated unfairly because Cote opted to ignore the positive impact that Apple had on introducing competition into the e-book market at a time when Amazon had a 90 percent market share.

Rather than being treated as a new entrant into the e-book market, which would have demanded a "rule of reason" analysis that judged Apple's impact on improving competition in a way that was good for consumers, Apple's role was viewed as "per se illegal" and automatically labeled anticompetitive despite Amazon's large command of the e-book market.

Circuit Judge Dennis Jacobs asked a Department of Justice lawyer why it was wrong for the publishers to get together to defeat a "monopolist" that was using "predatory pricing."

"It's like the mice getting together to put a bell on the cat," Jacobs said.

Circuit Judge Debra Livingston also said it was "troubling" that Apple's normally "perfectly legal" contracts were labeled as a scheme. A lawyer for Apple told the judges "We think the conduct here was innovative and pro-competitive." Should Apple win its appeal, it may not have to pay the $450 million settlement it reached in July. If the case is overturned, Apple will pay no fines, and if it's sent back to Judge Cote for a retrial, Apple will pay just $50 million to consumers and $20 million in attorney fees.

Top Rated Comments

napabar Avatar
126 months ago
What is this, Fox News?

Everything I am reading, Apple has no chance and the mountain of evidence that the original judge had is very sound.

http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/digital/content-and-e-books/article/65020-can-apple-win-its-e-book-appeal.html?utm_source=Publishers+Weekly&utm_campaign=3446655f4c-UA-15906914-1&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_0bb2959cbb-3446655f4c-304719213#path/pw/by-topic/digital/content-and-e-books/article/65020-can-apple-win-its-e-book-appeal.html?utm_source=Publishers+Weekly&utm_campaign=3446655f4c-UA-15906914-1&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_0bb2959cbb-3446655f4c-304719213



Good luck Apple and Fast Eddie, tap dancing out of this one.


Are you daft? The case against Apple is weak. Did you not read the appellate judges comments? Even they are finding it hard to believe.

Come back when you actually have read the article and put your anti-Apple, anti-business bias to rest.
Score: 13 Votes (Like | Disagree)
2457282 Avatar
126 months ago
I never understood what Apple did that was wrong. I still don't. Clearly I am not a lawyer and I am sure there is some strange law that creates a technicality that is being employed. However, for the average Joe (or Jose in my case :D), what makes sense is that Apple came in and provided the first viable option to Amazon. And have prices or competition improved since they were found guilty? No.

I hope this appeal will at least clarify what the heck the crime was in Joe/Jose terms.
Score: 8 Votes (Like | Disagree)
mw360 Avatar
126 months ago
Appellate judges? It was one of the three.

It was two of the three.
Score: 7 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Iconoclysm Avatar
126 months ago
But, but, but, a Judge prejudging a case before the trial has started is very bad, isn't?

This is an appeal...they're dealing directly with the DoJ...nice try!

----------

Weak??? They lost the case! That is why they are appealling.
Hhahahaha


Keep drinking the Kool-aide.

If it wasn't weak somehow, there would be no appeal. Please hold the unnecessary laughter when you reply.
Score: 6 Votes (Like | Disagree)
thekeyring Avatar
126 months ago
In a quick snapshot, here goes...

Amazon was selling ebooks, mostly for $9.99.

Jobs and Fast Eddie came up with a scheme to get into the ebook market for their new iPad, without having to compete with price (the last thing they wanted to do).
So they colluded with a bunch of publishers, who didn't like Amazon having so much control, to agree that the price would have to be set at $14.99, no sales, nothing.
If Amazon didn't like it, they couldn't sell the book at the price they wanted to.

And bad news for Apple, they caught Jobs on video admitting to it when asked about how to compete with Amazon, "it will cost the same".

oof.

Why is that illegal? Arguably, they were challenging Amazon's monopoly on ebooks, right?
Score: 6 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Lazy Avatar
126 months ago
Finally some sanity in a courtroom about this case.
Score: 5 Votes (Like | Disagree)

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...