Quantcast

Saturday, July 26, 2014         

 Print   Email   Comment | View 20 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

U.S. sues Apple, publishers over electronic books

By Larry Neumeister and Pete Yost

Associated Press

POSTED:
LAST UPDATED: 12:07 p.m. HST, Apr 11, 2012


WASHINGTON >> The Justice Department and 15 states sued Apple Inc. and major book publishers Wednesday, alleging a conspiracy to raise the price of electronic books they said cost consumers more than $100 million in the past two years by adding $2 to $5 to the price of each e-book.

Attorney General Eric Holder said executives at the highest levels of the companies conspired to eliminate competition among e-book sellers. Justice's antitrust chief Sharis Pozen said the executives were desperate to get Amazon.com, marketer of the Kindle e-book reader, to raise the $9.99 price point it had set for the most popular titles, which was substantially below their hardcover prices.

The federal government reached a settlement with three of the publishers, Hachette, HarperCollins and Simon & Shuster. But it will proceed with its lawsuit in federal court in New York City against Apple and Holtzbrinck Publishers, doing business as Macmillan, and The Penguin Publishing Co. Ltd., doing business as Penguin Group.

Connecticut and Texas, two of the 15 states filing a separate complaint, reached agreements with Hachette and HarperCollins to provide $52 million in restitution to consumers, using a formula based on the number of states participating and the number of e-books sold in each state. Other states in the case may sign onto the agreement.

Holder told a Justice Department news conference on Wednesday that "we believe that consumers paid millions of dollars more for some of the most popular titles" as a result of the alleged conspiracy. Pozen said the scheme added and average of $2 to $3 to the prices of individual books.

Connecticut Attorney General George Jepsen said the individual book markups went as high as $5 and the total cost to consumers was more than $100 million since April 2010, when the scheme allegedly took effect.

According to Pozen, Apple's Steve Jobs told publishers involved in the alleged conspiracy that "the customer pays a little more, but that's what you want anyway."

The lawsuit said the effort to get e-book prices reduced by Amazon.com came as Apple was preparing to launch the iPad. The government said the conspirators agreed that instead of selling books to retailers and letting them decide what retail price to charge, the publishers would convert the retailers into "agents" who could sell their books but not alter the publisher-set retail price. The scheme called for Apple to be guaranteed a 30 percent commission on each e-book it sold, the lawsuit said.

"To effectuate their conspiracy, the publisher defendants teamed up with defendant Apple, which shared the same goal of restraining retail price competition in the sale of e-books," the lawsuit said.

Apple did not immediately respond to a comment request.

Macmillan Chief Executive Officer John Sargent said in a letter to authors, illustrators and agents that the company has not settled because it is "hard to settle a lawsuit when you know you have done no wrong."

He said: "Macmillan did not act illegally. Macmillan did not collude."

Sargent said the filing of the lawsuit came after discussions with the Department of Justice that lasted months.

"But the terms the DOJ demanded were too onerous. After careful consideration, we came to the conclusion that the terms could have allowed Amazon to recover the monopoly position it had been building before our switch to the agency model," he said. "We also felt the settlement the DOJ wanted to impose would have a very negative and long term impact on those who sell books for a living, from the largest chain stores to the smallest independents."

At the heart of the e-book pricing debate is the industry's ongoing concerns about Amazon. Publishers see the "agency model" as their best, short-term hope against preventing the online retailer from dominating the e-book market and driving down the price of books to a level unsustainable for publishers and booksellers.

Since launching the Kindle in 2007, Amazon has made a point of offering best-sellers for $9.99. The discount is so deep from list prices of $20 and more that it's widely believed Amazon is selling the e-books at a loss as a way of attracting more customers and forcing competitors to lower their prices. Amazon also has been demanding higher discounts from publishers and stopped offering e-books from the Independent Publishers Group, a Chicago-based distributor, after they couldn't agree to terms.

When Apple launched its tablet computer two years ago, publishers saw two ways to balance Amazon's power: Enough readers would prefer Apple's shiny tablet over the Kindle to cut into Amazon's sales and the agency model would stabilize prices.

Apple's iBookstore has yet to become a major force, but publishers believes the new price model has reduced Amazon's market share from around 90 percent to around 60 percent, with Barnes & Noble's Nook in second at 25 percent. The iBookstore is believed to have 10 percent to 15 percent.

Macmillan's Sargent has found himself at the heart of the dispute. In early 2010, as publishers were trying to get Amazon to agree to Apple's pricing system, Amazon pulled all the listings for Macmillan books, from Jonathan Franzen's "The Corrections" to Barbara Ehrenreich's "Nickle and Dimed." Sargent refused to back down and Amazon eventually gave in.

New e-books from Macmillan and the other publishers investigated by the Justice Department often are priced initially between $12.99 and $14.99, with Amazon making a point of noting that the price was set by the publisher. Ironically, publishers usually make less money off the agency model than the traditional one because they receive a smaller percentage of the proceeds.

Random House Inc. was the only "big six" publisher not to agree to the agency model in 2010 and was not part of the lawsuit. But the publisher of Dan Brown, John Grisham and others did agree to terms with Apple last year and now must decide whether to keep prices the same, cut them to keep up with competitors or drop the agency model altogether. Random House spokesman Stuart Applebaum — the only of the big six publishers not involved in the case — said Random would have no comments Wednesday.

According to court papers, the settlement agreement reached with three publishers said the companies agreed that for two years they will not restrict, limit or impede an e-book retailer's ability to set, alter or reduce the retail price of any electronic book. It said the retailers will be able to offer price discounts and other forms or promotions to encourage consumers to buy one or more electronic books.

The agreement also calls for the defendants not to enter into any agreement or conspiracy with any electronic-book publisher to raise, stabilize, fix, set or coordinate the retail price or wholesale price of any electronic book.

___

Neumeister reported from New York. AP reporter Hillel Italie also contributed to this report from New York.







 Print   Email   Comment | View 20 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

COMMENTS
(20)
You must be subscribed to participate in discussions
By participating in online discussions you acknowledge that you have agreed to the TERMS OF SERVICE. An insightful discussion of ideas and viewpoints is encouraged, but comments must be civil and in good taste, with no personal attacks. Because only subscribers are allowed to comment, we have your personal information and are able to contact you. If your comments are inappropriate, you may receive a warning, and if you persist with such comments you may be banned from posting. To report comments that you believe do not follow our guidelines, email commentfeedback@staradvertiser.com.
Leave a comment

Please login to leave a comment.
noheawilli wrote:
Wow, dont they have anything better to do in washington? Econ 101: how to help a struggling economy? Bring a lawsuit against one of the best selling public stocks. At least more lawyers will be employed.
on April 11,2012 | 07:05AM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
Apple, Inc. is the most profitable corporation in America right now. I bet this was Obama's idea.
on April 11,2012 | 07:58AM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
Next time Barry, do not bail out too many companies, because you got yourself in a bind with your Federal Deficit. I bet this is a red herring, to get yourself reelected.
on April 11,2012 | 08:01AM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
Best solution? Have the Federal Government take over Apple, Inc. and use its market Cap to cover the Federal Deficit. Last time i heard, it did not work in Nazi Germany.
on April 11,2012 | 08:03AM
h20dragon wrote:
Perhaps the cost of ebooks will be competitive with books printed on paper. With a 10% discount on paperpback books (and sometimes more) at Barnes and Noble, who would want to buy a book at $9.99? Just wait six months which is the approximate time publishers go from hard cover books to paperback books of the same title being available.
on April 11,2012 | 08:45AM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
Just two days ago, I bought "Nooks for Dummies" from Barnes and Noble Kahala. Although I have The Nook Reader, I paid 10% more just to get the printed book, because to me, it is easier and faster to thumb through page rather than skim via The Nook Reader or this iPad I am using. Although I am an Old Dog who does not want to learn new tricks, I did get my start in computers in 1975, as a freshman at UH taking FORTRAN in EE 153, Computer Programming. I am surprised i did not get into Computer Science. All my life I have been fascinated with computers, including seeing the Apple II that a friend had, when I worked in California. I have been a Mac fan all my life. Rather I have been a computer fan all my life. I have a Toshiba Lap Top, an iPad3, an iPhone 4GS, a Nook Reader, and a Car, which runs a lot on computer chips. Hope I am doing fine. I think i am.
on April 11,2012 | 01:34PM
primowarrior wrote:
This is a smart move by the Fed because it sends a message that big business can't conspire to limit competition and fleece the American consumer. This was the intent of the Sherman Anti Trust Act. I'm glad there are folks in charge up there who are keeping an eye out for us.
on April 11,2012 | 09:26AM
joshislost wrote:
someone should sue the advertiser for sticking their noses in everything and attempting to monopolize the star bulletin once.
on April 11,2012 | 06:18PM
LizKauai wrote:
Crabs, crabs, crabs...
on April 11,2012 | 10:02AM
nigelUV001 wrote:
The government should have stayed away. I use Amazon all the time to get books to read on my Kindle. I luv Amazon but also understand that to much of a good thing can become a really bad thing when the markets adjust and settles. I like to think of the market as a kind of pizza. Where the cheese competes with the pepparoni. And the Focacia shouts "I'm here too" and then the other thousands of ingredients are overlooked and in the end someone gets the best/ above average pizza with the most popular ingrediants and at the best price when the dough rises...and then it starts all over again, and again and again because of competing mom and papa's and the huts and the tombstones and the boston's.
on April 11,2012 | 11:10AM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
Apple is just pricing their products accordingly. Speaking of prices, Barry please look into our Gasoline Prices. I thought you were for Hawaii and not against Hawaii.
on April 11,2012 | 01:36PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
My goodness, I hope the price of the Star-Advertiser does not go to $3.00 for Sunday editions.
on April 11,2012 | 01:37PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
75 cents for the daily and $2.00 for Sundays.
on April 11,2012 | 01:37PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
That you allow. I am talking anti-trust here.
on April 11,2012 | 01:38PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
Lawyers make money by filing lawsuits.
on April 11,2012 | 01:38PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
The sun shines daily and so does lawsuits.
on April 11,2012 | 01:38PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
Got the point !!!!
on April 11,2012 | 01:39PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
This will not stop until I do something about it.
on April 11,2012 | 01:39PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
You got it coming.
on April 11,2012 | 01:40PM
SteveToo wrote:
I can't see any reason for an eBook to cost $9.99 other than people are stupid enough to pay that much. What is the cost to the publisher?????????????? There is no paper to buy, no ink to buy, no printing presses to buy and maintaine. EBooks should cost just enough to pay the writer his share and the publisher the cost of maintaing the web site and then maybe 10-15% for profit.
on April 11,2012 | 05:37PM
IN OTHER NEWS
Breaking News
Blogs
Volley Shots
Fey, Enriques on MJNT

Political Radar
Wilhelmina Rise, et al.

Court Sense
Cold War

Political Radar
Climate change

Island Crafters
YouCanMakeThis.com

Warrior Beat
Empty pit

Political Radar
Switch

Political Radar
`Progressive hero’