U.S. government complains, claims Apple trying to rush e-books antitrust case

“The U.S. government says Apple Inc. wants to rush its New York antitrust lawsuit over the price of electronic books by finishing evidence gathering by year’s end, and the electronics king acknowledges it has a ‘special urgency’ in ending the case,” Larry Neumeister reports for The Associated Press.

“The government said in a letter filed in federal court in Manhattan on Thursday that it wants until March to finish gathering facts in a lawsuit it brought this year,” Neumeister reports. “Government lawyers… said they were trying to reveal ‘a long-running, detailed conspiracy that affected millions of U.S. consumers and likely involved multiple executives at each co-conspirator. Some of the acts in furtherance of the conspiracy occurred in Europe, where the defendants also pursued a similar course of conduct aimed at European consumers.'”

Neumeister reports, “In its own letter, Apple said its approach reflects a “special urgency” in resolving the case because of public interests at stake and to vindicate its conduct. It repeated its ‘unequivocal position: it believes it has done nothing wrong and seeks a speedy resolution of the Department of Justice’s lawsuit on the merits. It is also a reality that the mere existence of litigation of this type creates marketplace uncertainties, which impact competitive conditions and the public interest.'”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: As we’ve said from the very beginning of this fiasco: “The U.S. DOJ is plainly inept.”

Related articles:
Barnes & Noble blasts U.S. DOJ e-book settlement proposal – June 7, 2012
Apple: U.S. government’s e-book antitrust lawsuit ‘is fundamentally flawed as a matter of fact and law’ – May 24, 2012
Federal Judge rejects Apple and publishers’ attempt to dismiss civil case alleging e-book price-fixing – May 15, 2012
Court documents reveal Steve Jobs email pushing e-book agency model; 17 more states join class action suit – May 15, 2012
Apple vs. Amazon: Who’s really fixing eBook prices? – April 17, 2012
Apple: U.S. DOJ’s accusation of collusion against iBookstore is simply not true – April 12, 2012
Apple not likely to be a loser in legal fight over eBooks – April 12, 2012
16 U.S. states join DOJ’s eBook antitrust action against Apple, publishers – April 12, 2012
Australian gov’t considers suing Apple, five major publishers over eBook pricing – April 12, 2012
DOJ’s panties in a bunch over Apple and eBooks, but what about Amazon? – April 12, 2012
Antitrust experts: Apple likely to beat U.S. DOJ, win its eBook lawsuit – April 12, 2012
Why the market shrugged off the Apple antitrust suit – April 11, 2012
What’s wrong with the U.S. DOJ? – April 11, 2012
Macmillan CEO blasts U.S. DOJ; gov’t on verge of killing real competition for appearance of competition – April 11, 2012
U.S. DOJ hits Apple, major publishers with antitrust lawsuit, alleges collusion on eBook prices – April 11, 2012
U.S. DOJ may sue Apple over ebook price-fixing as early as today, sources say – April 11, 2012


  1. I find it hard to believe that it would take more than ONE month to gather evidence by the DOJ. Surely they had evidence before making accusations? But they want NINE months? Either I have no concept of the complexities of court evidence for such a trial or they are stalling due to lack of evidence (or wrong doing).

    1. Yeah, before you file charges aren’t you suppose to already have witnesseses, evidence?
      Is the DOJ really suppose to run around making baseless accusations and extorting money from companies?

  2. The Feds wasted money prosecuting John Edwards and Roger Clemens and investigating Lance Armstrong; now they are going to strike out again. What kind of attorneys is the DOJ hiring?

  3. The Feds have a weak case, and they know it. The longer they can delay, the more time they have to find something–anything–to bolster their case. The lawyers for O.J. Simpson saw the same thing, a weak case, so they insisted on a speedy trial. They won.

    Apple sees a weak case. Apple should be pushing for an immediate trial. According to the Sixth Amendment, a speedy trial is a right. If the courts are going to declare a corporation a “person” for taxation purposes, corporations should be people for trial purposes.

    1. They don’t have a case at all. They were hoping for everyone they charged to do the math and decide to knuckle under for business reasons, so they could pretend that they did something to “protect the public.”

      Holder’s looking for ANYTHING to distract people from his Mexican gun-running caper.


    2. Technically, the right to a speedy trial is for criminal charges, not civil cases. But one would think that, once a civil case is brought, that the plaintiff would have enough of a case prima facie. But the rampant growth of government size, power and arrogance (and I’m not just talking about the current administration) seems to make those in government think that they are our masters, rather than our servants.

      http://fortnightforfreedom.org — Viva Cristo Rey!

  4. Those shirkers in gummint need more money and more time than any private business. That’s why they’re in gummint jobs in the first place. Losers – ALL of them.

  5. Sounds like the hapless Justice Department is stalling yet again, just like they’re trying to stall the Congressional investigation of “Fast and Furious.”

    What ever happened to “have a good case BEFORE you file charges?”

  6. I don’t get it: the DOJ brought the charges, by asking for more time they’re saying they weren’t ready to prosecute and aren’t confident in their case or maybe didn’t have a case in the first place. They’ve lost already. Bozos.

    1. Yeah, but what’s so good about the alternative? Another dolt for President? More Bush League quality governance from the Oval Office? Please don’t be naive. We’re being shot by both sides. Both parties suck major balls, Corporate Oligarchy balls, certainly not those of the citizens who elect them and whom they have pledged to serve. I’d very much enjoy kicking the politicians in THEIR balls.

        1. No. Both suck because both serve The Corporate Oligarchy, just like you do. Both must die. A revolution is required to get the USA back to a CONSTITUTIONAL DEMOCRACY instead of the semi-fascist, neo-feudalism we have today. Therefore I invite you to take your ignorant opinions and shove them up your orifice. Live and learn tomorrow. You can do it! I know you can. You don’t HAVE to be ignorant.

          Wavy-Wave My-Own-Personal-Stalker!
          (^_^)/ 😆

    2. Do you really imagine that changing the administration will alter those who work in the background, the civil servants. In the UK, they never ever change, only the ones actually in government. I’m sure it’s exactly the same in the US.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.