1. Akshay Masand's Avatar

    In a courtroom located in Manhattan, the U.S. Department of Justice presented its opening arguments in the USA vs. Apple Inc, antitrust e-book price fixing trial. The Department of Justice filed suit last April and Apple has consistently defended itself and has said the accusations aren’t true. According to AllThingsD, Justice Department attorney Lawrence Buterman presented the government’s case this morning, using a slideshow filled with email and phone record evidence that the government says shows Apple colluded with book publishers to drive up the cost of e-books ahead of the launch of the iBookstore.

    For its part, Apple’s lead attorney claims the company was using the same strategies that worked when the company was amidst building the iTunes Music Store to get contracts with the major book publishers. The following was mentioned regarding the topic:

    Apple's opening statement […] tried to pull the rug out from under everything the DOJ had just presented. [Apple SVP Eddy] Cue, Snyder claims, was just trying to break into a crowded e-book market (one dominated by Amazon) using precisely the same approach he used when he got the company into the music market with iTunes and the applications market with the App Store. Those innovation poured billions of dollars into the U.S. economy, he said. "Apple should be applauded, not condemned."

    Apple’s Senior Vice President for Internet Software and Services, Eddy Cue, sits at the middle of the Department of Justice’s case and was responsible for much of the email and phone traffic mentioned in the government’s opening argument. He’s expected to take the stand on June 13th so we’ll hear more about the case then.

    Those of you who are interested in checking out the slideshow that was released by the DoJ can see it below:

    Source: AllThingsD
    Last edited by Akshay Masand; 2013-06-04 at 08:20 AM.

    Twitter: @AkshayMasand
    2013-06-04 08:15 AM
  2. REMED1AL's Avatar
    What's with all this documentations and evidence? The Judge already gave his opinion... and that is like gold right? He doesn't need to see documentation! There is no need to see the clear cut evidence that publishers didn't like Amazon undercutting the e-book prices or even that Apple had little to do with them working together aside from providing a competing venue to sell.

    Amazon seems to have used underhanded business practices more so than Apple here. They manipulated the price of e-book to the point of losing money to keep competition from entering into the game.
    Last edited by REMED1AL; 2013-06-04 at 03:30 PM.
    2013-06-04 03:25 PM
  3. dsg's Avatar
    the publishers each made a deal with Amazon if they didn't like the deal they made they should've returned to Amazon to work out a new deal, one that worked best for each individual publisher.

    Apple has crashed the party, is it price fixing, not sure we'll have to see what happens
    Last edited by dsg; 2013-06-04 at 10:43 PM.
    privacy isn't about having something to hide, another view here

    look here all grammar police, indulge me.
    2013-06-04 10:35 PM
  4. unison999's Avatar
    Typical lawyer trying to spin it to make Apple the good guy.
    Instead of saying Apple stuffed more money into it's pocket by price fixing with publisher, they say it put more money into economy...

    eBooks is suppose to be cheap, not much cost go into eBooks. You do not print anything, you do not need raw materials to print with, you do not need to have driver deliver to bookstores etc. Amazon sell it cheap benefit the customers, nobody complains they paid too cheaply for something. If Apple can not sell it as cheaply as Amazon, then they can sell it for more don't make Publisher set a price for everyone.
    2013-06-05 02:28 AM