US judge 'troubled' by Apple's $450m bid to end ebook price-fixing row

US federal judge Denise Cote is not particularly chuffed with Apple and its proposed $450m settlement in an ebook price-fixing lawsuit – because the odds are stacked against customers if the appeals process goes Cupertino's way. Apple and 33 American states and territories came to the deal on how much the company should pay …

[Anonymous Coward]

I still can't understand how no-one goes after amazon

Amazon are putting publishers out of business, a total monopoly yet no-one lifts a finger.

They sell books at a loss how can that not be anticompetitive?

Surely this is just dumping goods to destroy all competition

[David Knapman]

Re: I still can't understand how no-one goes after amazon

Because it's not illegal to have a monopoly - which I'm not even sure Amazon do have in any particular markets.

If we both set up companies selling the same product, and I happen to be able to sell it for cheaper than you are able to, and so I end up with the majority of customers, that's just the way things are. There's no legal, moral or ethical requirement that I raise my prices, you lower yours, or some government function intervenes, so as to balance the market between both of us.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I still can't understand how no-one goes after amazon

"Because it's not illegal to have a monopoly" absolutely. Abusing one is though. Selling at the prices they are would arguably constitute abuse, since the monopoly was established before Apple entered the market, thus abusing their position to prevent reasonable entry to a competitor. They seemingly have a buddy in Cote, who is frankly as dodgy as they come.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I still can't understand how no-one goes after amazon

I'm not sure where you feel Amazon abused their monopoly position to prevent Apples entry to the market.

Apple did enter the market, with others. Successfully I might add.

What they seemingly couldn't do was manage this and still make the profits they felt they were entitled to. Given Apple's normal pricing strategy that's not really a surprise. One of the ways Amazon got to where it is (and I'm not a supporter of them) is by the old mantra of packing them high and selling them cheap. Apple is utterly anti this philosophy.

To get round this and up their margins they then formed an anti-competitive price fixing cartel.

They then got caught.

It seems pretty clear.

[LosD]

Re: I still can't understand how no-one goes after amazon

Amazon does not books sell at a loss. They are hugely profitable.

They are using what's called a loss leader. A few books sold at a loss to get people buying more. Exactly like in supermarkets and other brick and mortar stores. That is not illegal at all.

What would be illegal, was to sell most of their goods below cost, to drive out the competition. They have never been accused of that.

[John Molloy]

Re: I still can't understand how no-one goes after amazon

"Amazon does not books sell at a loss. They are hugely profitable."

I take it you missed yesterday's earnings numbers?

"Amazon.com Inc. (AMZN) on Thursday reported a bigger loss in its second quarter, and missed analysts' expectations.

The Seattle-based company posted a loss of $126 million, or 27 cents per share, compared with $7 million, or 2 cents per share, in the same quarter a year earlier. The average estimate of analysts surveyed by Zacks Investment Research was for a loss of 13 cents per share."

[LosD]

Re: I still can't understand how no-one goes after amazon

... Because of investments in other areas than it's book business. Quite irrelevant.

[Trevor_Pott]

Re: I still can't understand how no-one goes after amazon

A loss of $126M for Amazon is significantly less than 1% of revenue. Amazon make a loss to avoid taxes, not because they are pricing competition out of the market. Even a lobotomised judge can understand that one.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I still can't understand how no-one goes after amazon

"Amazon are putting publishers out of business, a total monopoly yet no-one lifts a finger."

Wow... that's a new level of Apple Fanboism. You really should take a step back and evaluate your life.

If Amazon has a "total monopoly" on ebooks, you're saying no one has ever bought an ebook on Apple's store, ever?

Publishers make tens of dollars on items that cost pennies to create. Just like CDs.

Not to mention that if Amazon put publishers out of business, they would have no books to sell so their so called monopoly would be useless.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: I still can't understand how no-one goes after amazon

Bullseyed, where the fuck, as the rabid fandroid that you are, get off calling someone else a fanboi? Dick.

[Mephistro]

This looks like an exact clone of...

... the agreement in the "no poaching agreement" case against Apple. And I'll say the same thing I said then:

This agreement is an insult to justice.

It would seem that Apple has learnt a new trick. To boot: negotiating out of court agreements that are good for the lawyers but not for the plaintiffs.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This looks like an exact clone of...

How is that a new trick? It has been well-known to large companies for a while now…

[Mephistro]

Re: This looks like an exact clone of...

"How is that a new trick?"

New for Apple. And I don't mean necessarily that they didn't know the concept before, just that they didn't dare to use it, perhaps afraid of the PR backlash or the judges reactions. It would seem that nowadays they don't give a shit.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: This looks like an exact clone of...

No. The ruling is an insult to justice.

[MrDamage]

Re: The ruling is an insult to justice.

And your rabid fanboism is an insult to common sense.

Apple were found guilty of violating the law to the detriment of consumers. Don't get all shitty with the rest of society just because you now realise that your next iThing will be more expensive in order to pay for the legal costs of Apple's dodgy actions.

Learn some IT basics so you can then understand how to get 2 devices to communicate with each other outside of the Jobsian walled garden.

Cue the downvotes. Unlike you, I have the balls to put my name to my comments.

[Arctic fox]

@MrDamage Re: " Unlike you, I have the balls to put my name to my comments."

This has been a bugbear of mine for a long time. The same suspects use/abuse the facility to post anonymously to avoid having to take responsibility for what they post. This does not mean that I am calling for the facility to be withdrawn - far from it in fact. However, the cowardice/dishonesty in that kind of behaviour really fucks me off.

[Indolent Wretch]

Re: @MrDamage " Unlike you, I have the balls to put my name to my comments."

I think the problem many have is when their posts say something that may be actionable. This may just be the comment board on an IT site but I don't think this is an unreasonable fear given the way the world/net is going.

For example, let's say that further up this page I referred to Apple and the publishers forming an illegal price fixing cartel.

Let's say they win their appeal, the charges are struck down and then Apple's lawyers start googling for "libellous" postings.

Even though checking that "post anonymously" box puts only the smallest barrier (depends on the implementation) between my post and my account it's still comforting.

[Tony Paulazzo]

Cote found Apple liable for conspiring with the five major publishers to fix the price of ebooks

So why aren't they being punished? If Apple have $160 billion (or whatever) then $500 million is barely a piss in the ocean...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2014/04/13/fun-number-apple-has-twice-as-much-cash-as-the-us-government/

It’s true that when you look at the balance sheets then Apple, say, has $160 billion in cash available

So they should be fined, say 10% of their wealth. That would send a real message to all corporations: Don't fuck with the law!