http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=232 http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=232 https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/collusion https://www.l

http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=232 http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=232 https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/collusion https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/collusion https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/collusive_bidding https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/collusive_bidding https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/anticompetitive-practices https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/anticompetitive-practices https://www.accc.gov.au/business/anti-competitive-behaviour https://www.accc.gov.au/business/anti-competitive-behaviour The suppliers agreed to perform mutually beneficial acts, with Apple as a mediator and facilitator (see the emails and meetings referenced in this HN thread), which systematically reduced competition between the suppliers in the eBook market. It's quite plain, which is why Apple has been required to pay $450M in damages.