Apple Tells DoJ It Did Nothing Wrong; "Amazon Monopolistic"
3:00 PM - April 13, 2012 - By Kevin Parrish - Source : CNN Money
In response to the lawsuit filed by the Department of Justice against Apple and five publishers, Apple on Thursday evening offered a mere four-sentence statement compared to the 36-page lawsuit submitted to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The iPad company essentially painted its ebook move as an act of liberation rather than a violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act.
"The DoJ's accusation of collusion against Apple is simply not true," Apple stated. "The launch of the iBookstore in 2010 fostered innovation and competition, breaking Amazon's monopolistic grip on the publishing industry. Since then, customers have benefited from eBooks that are more interactive and engaging. Just as we've allowed developers to set prices on the App Store, publishers set prices on the iBookstore."
CNN Money breaks each sentence down, pointing out that the response was carefully crafted "as any Apple marketing slogan." The opening sentence immediately addresses accusations by the Department of Justice that Apple played a part of the collusion to raise ebook prices. Apple naturally claims that it isn't true, and as CNN Money points out, the 36-page complaint presents no evidence that Apple ever colluded with its own competitors about the price of ebooks. Instead, the complaint presents evidence against the five publishers.
The second sentence obviously voices Apple's fear -- as well as the five publishers -- of Amazon's dominance of the ebook market. Thing is, Amazon wasn't the only virtual retailer selling ebooks on the cheap: Barnes & Noble and Kobo offered wholesale prices as well. But Amazon struck gold with its highly popular Kindle ebook readers, thus it became a prime target. Here Apple paints itself as the liberator taking down the monopolist, and according to reports, it succeeded, knocking Amazon's 90-percent market share down to 60-percent.
The third sentence is just silly. The Department of Justice claims that the ebook price hike hurt customers, but if anything, it hurt publishers given that many customers may not see the value in an electronic book that costs more than a paperback. But Apple doesn't see it that way: the higher tag has somehow made ebooks more "interactive and engaging," or rather, they're a much better product than before. Oh, and the publishers actually set the prices -- Apple merely took its 30-percent cut, as the fourth sentence indicates.
The response concludes by Apple comparing the iBookstore with the App Store. This will likely be were Apple stands its ground, as the App Store model has worked just fine since its launch years ago. In fact, this model is used across most app store platforms although Amazon has taken the liberty of offering a free Android app each day. Thing is, software is typically sold by publishers at their set prices, whereas books are usually sold wholesale. Ebooks seemingly fall somewhere in the middle -- they're not software but they're not physical products either.
What will likely hurt Apple's case are comments made by Steve Jobs himself in his biography and emails obtained by the Department of Justice. As reported on Thursday, there seems to be enough evidence to push three publishers into settling out of court. The Department of Justice probably isn't showing its full hand of cards in the 36-page complaint -- that would be insane -- so expect this ebook pricing battle to get even more dramatic as the weeks roll along.
Someone get the popcorn and soda. We have the screen.
http://www.tomsguide.com/us/Apple-Department-of-Justice-Collusion-Ebooks-Amazon,news-14800.html
In response to the title, "Yeah, and Apple doesn't want to control a monopoly on tablets either..." or "Yeah, and Apple is a huge fan of Android." Feel free to pick my response.
3:00 PM - April 13, 2012 - By Kevin Parrish - Source : CNN Money
In response to the lawsuit filed by the Department of Justice against Apple and five publishers, Apple on Thursday evening offered a mere four-sentence statement compared to the 36-page lawsuit submitted to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The iPad company essentially painted its ebook move as an act of liberation rather than a violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act.
"The DoJ's accusation of collusion against Apple is simply not true," Apple stated. "The launch of the iBookstore in 2010 fostered innovation and competition, breaking Amazon's monopolistic grip on the publishing industry. Since then, customers have benefited from eBooks that are more interactive and engaging. Just as we've allowed developers to set prices on the App Store, publishers set prices on the iBookstore."
CNN Money breaks each sentence down, pointing out that the response was carefully crafted "as any Apple marketing slogan." The opening sentence immediately addresses accusations by the Department of Justice that Apple played a part of the collusion to raise ebook prices. Apple naturally claims that it isn't true, and as CNN Money points out, the 36-page complaint presents no evidence that Apple ever colluded with its own competitors about the price of ebooks. Instead, the complaint presents evidence against the five publishers.
The second sentence obviously voices Apple's fear -- as well as the five publishers -- of Amazon's dominance of the ebook market. Thing is, Amazon wasn't the only virtual retailer selling ebooks on the cheap: Barnes & Noble and Kobo offered wholesale prices as well. But Amazon struck gold with its highly popular Kindle ebook readers, thus it became a prime target. Here Apple paints itself as the liberator taking down the monopolist, and according to reports, it succeeded, knocking Amazon's 90-percent market share down to 60-percent.
The third sentence is just silly. The Department of Justice claims that the ebook price hike hurt customers, but if anything, it hurt publishers given that many customers may not see the value in an electronic book that costs more than a paperback. But Apple doesn't see it that way: the higher tag has somehow made ebooks more "interactive and engaging," or rather, they're a much better product than before. Oh, and the publishers actually set the prices -- Apple merely took its 30-percent cut, as the fourth sentence indicates.
The response concludes by Apple comparing the iBookstore with the App Store. This will likely be were Apple stands its ground, as the App Store model has worked just fine since its launch years ago. In fact, this model is used across most app store platforms although Amazon has taken the liberty of offering a free Android app each day. Thing is, software is typically sold by publishers at their set prices, whereas books are usually sold wholesale. Ebooks seemingly fall somewhere in the middle -- they're not software but they're not physical products either.
What will likely hurt Apple's case are comments made by Steve Jobs himself in his biography and emails obtained by the Department of Justice. As reported on Thursday, there seems to be enough evidence to push three publishers into settling out of court. The Department of Justice probably isn't showing its full hand of cards in the 36-page complaint -- that would be insane -- so expect this ebook pricing battle to get even more dramatic as the weeks roll along.
Someone get the popcorn and soda. We have the screen.
http://www.tomsguide.com/us/Apple-Department-of-Justice-Collusion-Ebooks-Amazon,news-14800.html
In response to the title, "Yeah, and Apple doesn't want to control a monopoly on tablets either..." or "Yeah, and Apple is a huge fan of Android." Feel free to pick my response.
