DOJ says Apple spearheaded e-book price-fixing scheme
The Department of Justice (DOJ) says theres one organization to blame for spearheading the e-book price-fixing schemeApple Inc.
May 16, 2013 at 07:25 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
The Department of Justice (DOJ) says there's one organization to blame for spearheading the e-book price-fixing scheme—Apple Inc.
The case dates back a little more than a year, when the DOJ filed suits against Apple and five publishers—MacMillan, Penguin Group, Hachette, HarperCollins and Simon & Schuster—for conspiring to fix e-book prices.
According to a number of filings the DOJ made public this week, Apple admitted to meeting with other publishing companies to craft agreements regarding the sale of e-books. Apple said, however, that each of the companies independently decided to force Amazon to raise the prices of its e-books.
But the DOJ sees it differently, implying in its recent filings that Apple started the e-book antitrust ball rolling.
Through meetings with various publishing executives, “Apple set out to impose a new distribution model on e-books, a so-called agency model, under which [defendants Hachette Book Group, HarperCollins, Holtzbrinck Publishers, and Simon & Schuster] could set their higher consumer prices and then hand over the extra revenues to Apple,” the DOJ's filing said. The department goes on to say that its claims are backed up through email evidence, including one between Steve Jobs and head of HarperCollins Rupert Murdoch, whose reputation is already highly questionable.
Not surprisingly, Apple denies the accusations.
“Apple did not conspire to fix eBook pricing,” Tom Neumayr, a spokesman for Apple, said in statement to Bloomberg. “We helped transform the eBook market with the introduction of the iBookstore in 2010 bringing consumers an expanded selection of eBooks and delivering innovative new features. The market has been thriving and innovating since Apple's entry and we look forward to going to trial to defend ourselves.”
Since the DOJ filed its e-book antitrust suit in 2012, all the publishers have settled—MacMillan just last month.
Read more InsideCounsel coverage of the e-book suits:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllWhat to Know About the New 'Overlapping Directorship' Antitrust Development
4 minute readThe Met Hires GC of Elite University as Next Legal Chief
Tesla, Musk Appeal Chancery Compensation Case to Delaware Supreme Court
2 minute readEx-Marathon General Counsel Takes Legal Reins of Another Energy Company
Trending Stories
- 1Bradley Arant, Moore & Van Allen Join Partner Promotions Parade
- 27th Circ. Rejects Liability Claims Against Freight Broker's Hiring Choices
- 3Sullivan & Cromwell Signals 5-Day RTO Expectation as Law Firms Remain Split on Optimal Attendance
- 4CLOSED: These Georgia Courts Won't Open Jan. 10
- 5Volkswagen Hit With Consumer Class Action Alleging Defective SUV Engines
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250