6 ms·

Apple contemplated illegally dividing the digital content world with Amazon

19 points by lleims 15y ago

smashing 15y ago
In other news I contemplated illegally robbing a Las Vegas casino after watching Oceans 11. Unfortunately, it wasn't a conspiracy as I just kept it myself, until now. How do I get Peter Kafka's attention? My company needs press, too.
- burgerbrain 15y ago
  Don't you think that there might be a difference between a person contemplating something, and an organization of people doing so?
  - sp332 15y ago
    No. Unless you can prove that there was an actual conspiracy with intent, there's nothing illegal going on. Corporations are allowed to fantasize just like people (as long as there's no blatant fraud involved). Or did you mean some other difference?
    - _delirium 15y ago
      > Corporations are allowed to fantasize just like people That's not necessarily true, since groups of people fantasizing tends to involve a lot more externalized things that might be evidence. If I dream at night about bombing a federal building, I probably won't be arrested for it, but if I meet weekly with a group of people where we discuss bombing federal buildings and how we might go about it, that's starting to get a lot more sketchy. Similarly, if there are corporate memos flying around and strategy meetings/documents contemplating illegal activity, that's not necessarily a-ok.
      - deleted 15y ago
        [deleted]
      - zobzu 15y ago
        I don't know how many times me and friends went about how to rob a bank. Surely we should be set on fire. More than that, Apple "contemplated" it, then decided against it, maybe because, like "oh that doesn't sound legal, we can't do that" ? And, I don't like Apple. But that's no reason.
      - Anechoic 15y ago
        but if I meet weekly with a group of people where we discuss bombing federal buildings and how we might go about it, that's starting to get a lot more sketchy You basically just described my college experience. (or a white-hat conference).
    - burgerbrain 15y ago
      > "there's nothing illegal going on." That's not what I asked, is it? Or do you mean that only illegal activities are worthy of our attention?
- huxley 15y ago
  I got a completely different impression, it seems to me that Peter Kafka was ridiculing the conspiracy allegations in the DoJ complaint.
nextstep 15y ago
Even though these "plans" were not enacted, this evidence could be damning in Apple's larger fight. I predict that Apple and the publishers will be fined. Hopefully the result of the DoJ's investgation is that vendors adopt a wholesale model, which will probably drop the price of e-books.
zobzu 15y ago
I contemplate killing all world leaders every next day due to such articles. Yet, they're still alive. Does that mean I'm going to jail? Are we that dumb yet? I bet in a decade or so, if things keep going the way they are, it will be a reason to actually be jailed/fined. And that's scary. Maybe I should stop contemplating ;-)
- TheCowboy 15y ago
  We'll take you more seriously when you're in a position of power where you can put these desires into effect with the wave of a pen. There is a big difference between the inner thoughts people entertain, and discussions and negotiations where people actively consider pursuing illegal actions. If you began meeting with friends about how to assassinate the president and the authorities found out, I'm pretty sure you'd get a legitimate knock on the door from the Secret Service.
andr3w321 15y ago
This article explains what exactly happened much better. It was much more than just "contemplating to collude." http://money.cnn.com/2012/04/11/technology/apple-doj-ebooks/index.htm?hpt=hp_t1 http://money.cnn.com/2012/04/11/technology/apple-doj-ebooks/... Amazon forced publishers to sell most books at $9.99 -- a price that came in below the cost of the books. According to the DOJ, booksellers were unnerved by the discounted e-book price structure Amazon launched in 2007. The publishers went to Apple in late 2009 to find a way to force Amazon to raise its prices. The iPad proved to be the perfect tool to accomplish that. The alleged conspiracy placed many books at so-called "agency pricing," putting them on the market for about $12.99 and giving Apple a 30% cut. About three days later, Amazon allowed publishers to set their own prices, resulting in higher prices on the Kindle as well.
muchonada 15y ago
Which is why Apple should've withheld dividends for another year and stock piled enough cash for a hostile takeover of Amazon and taken over the world!

19 points by lleims 15y ago

In other news I contemplated illegally robbing a Las Vegas casino after watching Oceans 11. Unfortunately, it wasn't a conspiracy as I just kept it myself, until now. How do I get Peter Kafka's attention? My company needs press, too.

burgerbrain 15y ago
Don't you think that there might be a difference between a person contemplating something, and an organization of people doing so?
- sp332 15y ago
  No. Unless you can prove that there was an actual conspiracy with intent, there's nothing illegal going on. Corporations are allowed to fantasize just like people (as long as there's no blatant fraud involved). Or did you mean some other difference?
  - _delirium 15y ago
    > Corporations are allowed to fantasize just like people That's not necessarily true, since groups of people fantasizing tends to involve a lot more externalized things that might be evidence. If I dream at night about bombing a federal building, I probably won't be arrested for it, but if I meet weekly with a group of people where we discuss bombing federal buildings and how we might go about it, that's starting to get a lot more sketchy. Similarly, if there are corporate memos flying around and strategy meetings/documents contemplating illegal activity, that's not necessarily a-ok.
    - deleted 15y ago
      [deleted]
    - zobzu 15y ago
      I don't know how many times me and friends went about how to rob a bank. Surely we should be set on fire. More than that, Apple "contemplated" it, then decided against it, maybe because, like "oh that doesn't sound legal, we can't do that" ? And, I don't like Apple. But that's no reason.
    - Anechoic 15y ago
      but if I meet weekly with a group of people where we discuss bombing federal buildings and how we might go about it, that's starting to get a lot more sketchy You basically just described my college experience. (or a white-hat conference).
  - burgerbrain 15y ago
    > "there's nothing illegal going on." That's not what I asked, is it? Or do you mean that only illegal activities are worthy of our attention?
huxley 15y ago
I got a completely different impression, it seems to me that Peter Kafka was ridiculing the conspiracy allegations in the DoJ complaint.

nextstep 15y ago

Even though these "plans" were not enacted, this evidence could be damning in Apple's larger fight. I predict that Apple and the publishers will be fined. Hopefully the result of the DoJ's investgation is that vendors adopt a wholesale model, which will probably drop the price of e-books.

zobzu 15y ago

I contemplate killing all world leaders every next day due to such articles. Yet, they're still alive. Does that mean I'm going to jail? Are we that dumb yet? I bet in a decade or so, if things keep going the way they are, it will be a reason to actually be jailed/fined. And that's scary. Maybe I should stop contemplating ;-)

TheCowboy 15y ago
We'll take you more seriously when you're in a position of power where you can put these desires into effect with the wave of a pen. There is a big difference between the inner thoughts people entertain, and discussions and negotiations where people actively consider pursuing illegal actions. If you began meeting with friends about how to assassinate the president and the authorities found out, I'm pretty sure you'd get a legitimate knock on the door from the Secret Service.

andr3w321 15y ago

This article explains what exactly happened much better. It was much more than just "contemplating to collude." http://money.cnn.com/2012/04/11/technology/apple-doj-ebooks/index.htm?hpt=hp_t1 http://money.cnn.com/2012/04/11/technology/apple-doj-ebooks/... Amazon forced publishers to sell most books at $9.99 -- a price that came in below the cost of the books. According to the DOJ, booksellers were unnerved by the discounted e-book price structure Amazon launched in 2007. The publishers went to Apple in late 2009 to find a way to force Amazon to raise its prices. The iPad proved to be the perfect tool to accomplish that. The alleged conspiracy placed many books at so-called "agency pricing," putting them on the market for about $12.99 and giving Apple a 30% cut. About three days later, Amazon allowed publishers to set their own prices, resulting in higher prices on the Kindle as well.

muchonada 15y ago

Which is why Apple should've withheld dividends for another year and stock piled enough cash for a hostile takeover of Amazon and taken over the world!