Apple’s ebook trial

Adam Engst takes a look at the Apple’s ebook trial and answers some of the questions everyone has asked over the past few months.

  • Fascinating read.

  • GFYantiapplezealots

    Sounds like Apple was “Guilty until proven innocent” from the start.

    • “What’s now clear is that this wasn’t the gaffe it was made out to be. In accordance with the court’s procedures for non-jury trials, much of the information was submitted during the pre-trial phase.”

      Seems Adam cleared it up as not the case.

  • DanPierce

    The article does raise one question: will Amazon be investigated for predatory pricing?

    • adamengst

      That’s entirely unrelated to this particular lawsuit, and so there’s no comment about that other than the quote from the judge that I pulled and ran in the article. My non-lawyer thinking is that perhaps early on, when Amazon was absolutely engaging in predatory pricing, the ebook market was too small to attract antitrust attention ($100 million of a $42 billion industry). Today, Amazon’s practices have changed (in part due to the publisher settlements), and Amazon has gone from 90% of the market to maybe 60-65% of the market, so it’s possible that they’re not considered sufficiently dominant any more.

      But again, I don’t even play an antitrust lawyer on TV, so I can’t comment with any authority.

  • Moeskido

    Mr. Engst was very helpful in outlining some of these issues on the last Your Mac Life podcast. It’s good to have someone who can parse and translate this stuff.

  • Sounds like, unsurprisingly, a massively Apple-bias article