Apple Ebook Price Fixing Ruling Upheld, Ordered to Pay $450 Million

Advertisement
By Reuters | Updated: 1 July 2015 09:24 IST
A divided federal appeals court on Tuesday said Apple Inc orchestrated a conspiracy with five publishers to increase ebook prices, in a victory for the U.S. Justice Department.

By a 2-1 vote, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with a lower court judge that the conspiracy violated federal antitrust law, and that the judge acted properly in imposing an injunction to prevent a recurrence.

Writing for the majority, Circuit Judge Debra Ann Livingston said that by organizing the conspiracy, "Apple found an easy path to opening its iBookstore," while ensuring that marketwide prices rose to a level that Apple and the publishers wanted.

The ruling will uphold not just Apple's civil liability but also the terms of an injunction that limited its agreements with publishers.

Advertisement

The decision also means Apple will be required to pay $450 million as part of a related settlement with 33 attorneys general and lawyers for a class of consumers. The accord had been contingent on Apple's liability being upheld.

Advertisement

Neither Apple nor the Justice Department, which had pursued the civil lawsuit to trial, responded immediately to requests for comment.

The appeal followed a 2013 decision by U.S. District Judge Denise Cote in Manhattan finding that Apple played a "central role" in a conspiracy with publishers to eliminate retail price competition and raise ebook prices.

Advertisement

The Justice Department, which secured the ruling following a non-jury trial, said the scheme caused some ebook prices to rise to $12.99 or $14.99 from the $9.99 price charged by the dominant player in the market, Amazon Inc.

The publishers that the Justice Department said conspired with Apple include Lagardere SCA's Hachette Book Group Inc, News Corp's HarperCollins Publishers LLC, Penguin Group Inc, CBS Corp's Simon & Schuster Inc and Verlagsgruppe Georg von Holtzbrinck GmbH's Macmillan.

Advertisement

In a dissenting opinion, U.S. Circuit Judge Dennis Jacobs said he would have reversed Cote's 2013 ruling, finding that Apple's behavior was pro-competitive in taking on a "monopolist," Amazon, which controlled 90 percent of the market.

"Apple took steps to compete with a monopolist and open the market to more entrants, generating only minor competitive restraints in the process," Jacobs wrote.

The case is U.S. v. Apple Inc, 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 13-3741.

© Thomson Reuters 2015

 

Get your daily dose of tech news, reviews, and insights, in under 80 characters on Gadgets 360 Turbo. Connect with fellow tech lovers on our Forum. Follow us on X, Facebook, WhatsApp, Threads and Google News for instant updates. Catch all the action on our YouTube channel.

Further reading: Apple, Ebook, Internet
Advertisement

Related Stories

Popular Mobile Brands
  1. Oppo Reno 15 Series Tipped to Get a Fourth Model With a 7,000mAh Battery
  2. Realme Neo 8 Might Be Launched Next Month With These Specifications
  3. Google's Space AI Idea Is Bold, But Here's Why Scientists Are Worried
  1. ISS Astronauts Celebrate Christmas in Orbit, Send Messages to Earth
  2. Arctic Report Card Flags Fast Warming, Record Heat and New Risks
  3. Battery Breakthrough Uses New Carbon Material to Boost Stability and Charging Speeds
  4. Ek Deewane Ki Deewaniyat Is Streaming Now: Know Where to Watch the Romance Drama Online
  5. Realme Neo 8 Said to Feature Snapdragon 8 Gen 5 Chipset, Could Launch Next Month
  6. Revolver Rita Is Now Streaming Online: Know Where to Watch the Tamil Action Comedy
  7. Oppo Reno 15 Series Tipped to Get a Fourth Model With a 7,000mAh Battery Ahead of India Launch
  8. Interstellar Comet 3I/ATLAS Shows Rare Wobbling Jets in Sun-Facing Anti-Tail
  9. Samsung Could Reportedly Use BOE Displays for Its Galaxy Smartphones, Smart TVs
  10. Google’s Space-Based AI Data Centre Plan Faces Collision Risks in an Increasingly Crowded Orbit
Gadgets 360 is available in
Download Our Apps
Available in Hindi
© Copyright Red Pixels Ventures Limited 2025. All rights reserved.