Apple battles U.S. government over scope of e-books injunction

“The United States offered to ease the terms of a proposed civil injunction against Apple Inc for conspiring to raise e-book prices, but the company said the revised proposal is still designed to ‘inflict punishment’ and must be rejected,” Reuters reports.

“Apple says the government is overreaching by insisting that it hire an external monitor, let e-book retailers add hyperlinks to their own websites in their e-book apps without charge, and face limits on how it negotiates for other content including movies, music and TV shows.,” Reuters reports. “In a court filing, the U.S. Department of Justice, joined by 33 U.S. states and territories, suggested halving the length of its previously proposed injunction to five years from 10, with leave to seek as many as five one-year extensions if needed.”

Reuters reports, “In a separate court filing, Apple said the proposal for an external monitor ‘exceeds the bounds of even criminal price-fixing cases,’ and reflects an effort ‘to use this civil injunction to inflict punishment, which is impermissible.’ The company said its own proposed remedies are stringent enough, and enable it to remain ‘one of the world’s most innovative companies, while acting consistently with both the letter and spirit of the antitrust laws.’ Apple has said it is appealing from Cote’s July 10 ruling.”

Read more in the full article here.

Related articles:
In pretrial view, judge says leaning toward U.S. DOJ over Apple in e-books case – May 24, 2013
Lawyers have complained for years that Judge Denise Cote pre-judges cases before she enters the courtroom – August 14, 2013

U.S.A. v. Apple: Apple faces possible May 2014 trial on e-book damages – August 15, 2013
Judge Denise Cote scolds Apple for being ‘unrepentant’ in e-book antitrust case – August 12, 2013
U.S.A. v. Apple: U.S. District Judge Denise Cote erred during e-books trial, Apple says – August 9, 2013
U.S.A. v. Apple: Cupertino wants a stay in e-books case; DOJ claims publishers are conspiring again – August 9, 2013
U.S.A. v. Apple: DOJ seeks wide-ranging oversight of iTunes Store – August 2, 2013
Apple rejects U.S. DOJ’s proposed e-book penalties as ‘a draconian and punitive intrusion’ – August 2, 2013
U.S.A. v. Apple: DOJ wants to force Apple to revamp e-book practices – August 2, 2013
U.S.A. v. Apple: Cupertino could get smacked with $500 million bill in ebook case – July 25, 2013
U.S.A. v. Apple verdict could end the book as we know it – July 11, 2013
U.S. DOJ unwittingly causes further consolidation, strengthens Amazon’s domination of ebook industry – July 11, 2013
Where’s the proof that Apple conspired with publishers on ebook pricing? – July 10, 2013
U.S.A. v. Apple ruling could allow U.S. government to monitor, interfere with future Apple negotiations – July 10, 2013
Judge Denise Cote likely wrote most of her U.S.A. v. Apple ebooks case decision before the trial – July 10, 2013
U.S.A. v. Apple: NY judge rules Apple colluded to fix ebook prices, led illegal conspiracy, violated U.S. antitrust laws – July 10, 2013
In U.S.A. v. Apple e-books case, witness Barnes & Noble VP Theresa Horner was everything Apple could hope for – June 19, 2013
The Apple e-books trial takes a detour into the absurd – June 18, 2013
Steve Jobs, Winnie the Pooh and the iBookstore Launch – June 17, 2013
Apple set to present its defense in e-book antitrust case – June 17, 2013
Steve Jobs was initially opposed to entering the e-book market – June 14, 2013
U.S.A. v. Apple: DOJ’s last best chance in e-book case has passed – June 14, 2013
Obama admin trying to throw the book at Apple; U.S. DOJ goes after an innovator whose market entry reduced prices – June 13, 2013
Apple’s Eddy Cue denies price-fixing allegations at U.S v. Apple e-books trial – June 13, 2013
Apple fires back at DOJ with email Steve Jobs actually sent – June 13, 2013
Is Steve Jobs’ unsent email a smoking gun in Apple e-book case? – June 12, 2013
Winds shift toward Apple in U.S. DOJ’s e-book trial – June 12, 2013
Day 5 of the Apple ebooks trial: Publishing execs testify; Rupert Murdoch’s role – June 11, 2013
U.S. v. Apple iBookstore case could go to the Supreme Court – June 5, 2013
Apple accuses DOJ of unfairly twisting Steve Jobs’ words in e-book case – June 4, 2013
U.S. DOJ prosecutors accuse Apple of driving up e-book prices – June 3, 2013
U.S. v. Apple goes to trial; DOJ claims e-book price-fixing conspiracy with Apple as ringmaster – June 3, 2013
U.S. DOJ takes Apple to trial alleging e-book price-fixing – June 2, 2013
Penguin to pay $75 million in e-book settlement with US State Attorneys General – May 23, 2013
The hot mess that is Apple’s e-book legal fight with U.S. DOJ – May 16, 2013
Apple: Deals with publishers improved e-books competition – May 15, 2013
Apple tells U.S. DOJ of tough talks, not collusion, with publishers – May 15, 2013
EU ends e-book pricing antitrust probe into e-book pricing; accepts offer by Apple, four publishers – December 13, 2012
Apple, publishers offer EU e-book antitrust settlement – September 19, 2012
Judge rubber-stamps U.S. e-books settlement – September 6, 2012
Apple, four publishers offer e-books antitrust concessions, says source – August 31, 2012
Apple bashes Amazon, calls U.S. DOJ settlement proposal ‘fundamentally unfair, unlawful, and unprecedented’ – August 16, 2012
U.S. antitrust settlement with e-book publishers should be approved, feds say – August 4, 2012
U.S. Justice Department slams Apple, refuses to modify e-book settlement – July 23, 2012
U.S. senator Schumer: Myopic DOJ needs to drop Apple e-books suit – July 18, 2012
Apple’s U.S. e-books antitrust case set for 2013 trial – June 24, 2012
U.S. government complains, claims Apple trying to rush e-books antitrust case – June 21, 2012
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

19 Comments

    1. The Obama administration is by far the worst presidency in my 41 years of life, he ranks as one of the worst presidents of US history. The DOJ is just one aspect of this horrendous administration, but the sad part is the public doesn’t really even care and can’t see a president past how they appear on TV. He’s a good looking guy but what a disaster.

      1. I take it you were in a coma or something during the Reagan and Bush Jr. years. I’ve got PLENTY of bones to pick with the Obama administration, but give me a break. We’ve had WAY worse presidents in your lifetime.

      2. Though his record is more like a moderate Republican (despite running under Democratic party) the Obama admins inherited quite a pile from the Bush admin. The real issue is with the right-wing teabags in the House and Senator Gridlock from Kentucky and the silliness of the record number of right-wing filibusters. The Prez can only propose, Congress disposes…

  1. Apple, why not play by their own corrupt rules. Start selling every book there is for $5. When Amazon starts to sell them at that lower price lower the price again until Amazon has to sell at such a loss that they then realize that the publishers must set the price.

    Better still pump $10 Billion into a subsidiary of Apple that looks just like Amazon. Call it Damn-azon. Let them compete and see how long Amazon lasts.

    1. Dump just $1 billion into an endowment for a non-profit Library type organization that lends/rents and sells e-books on the iTunes store for the price of royalties. Undercut Amazon and the Government by taking money out of the picture. And sell them on Android, too. Cheap books for everyone.

  2. I LOVE the fact it isn’t enough for Judge Kook to falsely convict Apple but the expectation they must grovel in her court though they know what they did and were not trying to do, the collusion thing with other publishers. So it’s galling being innocent and found guilty and then expected to embrace a single judge’s verdict and espouse to the world just how “guilty” you are. This shows justice is off the rails and veering toward the insane. Plenty of people have been exonerated after being tried and falsely found guilty so it’s disingenuous to have anyone embrace a bad verdict. Courts have to also recognize their own potential fallibility and misread of evidence. I still find it amazing they are accommodating an Amazon book monopoly instead. Like I said, insane.

  3. Guess the judge doesn’t understands that the Apple closed system is for security. What happens when you buy a book from Abe Books and turns out you bought a virus, Trojan, malware, …..

  4. This troubles me… “The company said its own proposed remedies are stringent enough,…”

    Say what?

    If you say you did nothing wrong, did nothing wrong, and intend to appeal based on the notion you did nothing wrong… then just why and what exactly are you “proposing stringent remedies” for?

      1. This judge is being a douche.

        Imagine a judge that keeps an open mind on everything and gives a fair and balanced trial… there would be no reason to be pissed off in that case. That kind of judge would be pleased to receive information from both concerned parties without preconceived notions fed to them prior as is the case here.

    1. If the judge was a flight attendant and APPLE was a passenger……the flight attendant might say you are not getting on the plane unless you agree to wear a straight jacket. Apple might ask why…since he has done nothing wrong and has already gone through security. The flight attendant might then say, “OK, no straight jacket, just handcuffs”. Apple, might then be compelled to suggest a second body search even though he has done nothing wrong.

      See how that works? Even though Apple did nothing wrong, it could still be compelled into suggesting a solution to the problem.

  5. That kind of proposition from the DOJ/GOV is basically cutting Apple right on the jugular vein. The DOJ/Judge and US Gov should he ashamed of themselves for targeting a true American success story while allowing another to monopolize the market without blinking an eye. Shame on you DOJ, Judge and US GOV!

  6. Ah yes “the governments said the Cupertino, California-based company’s continuing refusal to admit it did anything wrong warranted tough medicine.”

    Indeed I hope that when this is tossed out on appeal that this judge gets a dose of tough medicine.
    The power and control freak needs a bit of tough medicine herself.

Reader Feedback

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