5 ms·
The publishers had the federal government on their back because of lobbying from Amazon.
by gress 12y ago
The publishers had the federal government on their back because of lobbying from Amazon.
- SoftwareMaven 12y agoIf your suppliers were in collusion with a major competitor, wouldn't you be asking for support from the authorities?
- gress 12y agoA monopolist facing competition from a competent new entrant will use whatever methods are available to keep their position.
- YokoZar 12y agoIt's more correct to describe the collusion of the publishers as a cartel than as a monopolist here. They work together in collusive price-fixing arrangements. Amazon may have just enough market power as a customer of theirs to break this arrangement, however it would be quite a stretch to call Amazon a monopsony.
- revelation 12y agoNah, I think it was because of those charming Steve Jobs emails. I invite anyone to read the original complaint [1] for the details. We've seen this in the no poaching agreements... the dude certainly wrote a lot of emails without consulting his lawyers. 1: http://www.justice.gov/atr/cases/f282100/282135.pdf http://www.justice.gov/atr/cases/f282100/282135.pdf
- gress 12y agoWrong - Amazon was behind it: http://www.salon.com/2014/01/12/amazons_bogus_anti_apple_crusade/ http://www.salon.com/2014/01/12/amazons_bogus_anti_apple_cru...
- revelation 12y agoSure, somebody has to ring the bell. But rest assured, this case was standing on its very own legs. People have this tendency to jump to the "big questions" that the law and judges simply aren't concerned with. There was very clear evidence here, and your opinion of Amazon doesn't factor into it.
- gress 12y agoYour faith in the impartiality of legal processes is most refreshing.
- fpgeek 12y agoGP wasn't making a statement about the impartiality of legal processes [1], they were making a statement about the evidence in this case. If you'd like to dispute that, I'd suggest looking at some of it. [1] In fact, the comment "somebody has to ring the bell" suggests significant awareness of biases in and limitations of legal processes.
- gress 12y agoThe point is that the selection of defendant is what this is all about. Amazon could equally well be subject to an antitrust case.