“In this respect, Apple has been its own worst enemy,” he said. “This lack of cooperation has cast an unnecessary shadow over meaningful progress in developing a comprehensive and effective antitrust compliance program.”
Perhaps Apple, like many of us, are still wondering how the hell Amazon gets away with so much, without any punishment.
That’s the defense of a 6 Year old.. “Little Johnny getting away with it.. so why can’t I” How about taking them to task just like Amazon. If not then you comment should be. “Apple needs better lobbyist:
It’s more like noticing “Little Johnny” seems to have a get out of jail free card. Saying Apple needs to bribe the government is not acceptable.
This is from Michael Bromwich? The guy that wanted to interrogate Ive even though he had nothing to do with ebooks? I’ll take his words with a grain of salt.
Have you ever had to deal with the presence of a prodigal son?
Sounds a bit as though Bromwich wants to keep the meter running.
Is this the same antitrust monitor that has been overstepping his mandate as well as sending increasingly larger invoices to Apple for said overreach?
Sounds like a profitable gig. How do I get to be a monitor?
We can snicker all we want about who gets away with what. In the real world, lobbying works. Amazon has been politically active from day 1. Apple has naively stayed out of lobbying until recently. This is what happens.
That bozo is going to be his own worst enemy when Apple finally sues him for corruption and collusion with the Judge.
That bozo worked his connections hard to get this assignment so he can retire early. I’ll be very surprised if Apple actually goes after him.
Still baffled at this through-the-looking-glass world of antitrust in which the advent of competition in a space that previously had none is somehow anti-competitive….
This ignores that Apple has significantly more market power than Amazon. Amazon is the #9 retailer in the US by revenue. At its peak, Netscape had over 80% of the browser market, does that mean the DOJ should have focused on Netscape instead of Microsoft during the browser wars?
Bromwich and Cote should both be disbarred. They’re a pox on society and an affront to jurisprudence.
“If cote keeps me on” / please please don’t cut off that sweet sweet cashola I’ll say anything!
I hope they do.. IANAL but this guy seems even less legally minded, mentioning Hachette without Amazon is just.. Unbelievable.
Yes, if Netscape had thrown its market power around to the degree that Microsoft certainly did.
Microsoft didn’t have any browser market power, it had market power in other arenas that it threw around. That’s what they got hammered for. Apple got hit for organizing a publishers’ price fixing conspiracy.
And now you’re splitting hairs. Isn’t the point that Netscape didn’t do this sort of thing? Isn’t the point that Apple hasn’t done so, either?
This is false. Prior to the anti-trust suit, Apple and Amazon had virtually the same amount of spend on lobbyists (~$2.2M in 2011) and were within the same ballpark prior to that.
But Apple did organize a price fixing conspiracy, which is illegal. And has sufficient market power to make it stick. What has Amazon done akin to organizing a price fixing conspiracy or forbidding their customers from selling elsewhere (which is the MS analog)?
Umm, MS not only has “browser market power” they had “computer os power” … its like owning the NY Yankings and being the commissioner (or “owner”) major league baseball …
If by “organize”, you mean they wanted to support publishers and make content producers “happy”, I guess you are correct. I think this is the same “fixing” as they do for their iOS and Mac OS developers …
So a predatory monopoly never comes to mind? What about Amazon using its considerable market power to sell certain items at a loss – or to refuse to sell other items – if certain items are not allowed to be sold at a loss?
Some companies will play the “long game”. So it was with Netscape vs Microsoft … and you may do well to realize it was not Netscape vs Internet Explorer … MS used its market power (and monopoly) to build and bundle a browser for no extra cost or effort …
$2,000/hr is a great price for a great attorney … though I would never say this guy is even a good attorney, he does appear to make up for his lack of lawyering with a hefty supply of attitude and “balls”…
spend about $150 to $300K on an Ivy league law degree, pass the bar with flying colors (or make it seem that way after your 3rd try) and then become a total deuce.
“I think this is the same “fixing” as they do for their iOS and Mac OS developers …”
Creating a price fixing conspiracy “supports” publishers and makes content producers happy. It’s also terrible for content purchasers and is crazy illegal.
Also, iOS and MacOS developers aren’t mandated MFN status and only selling their software with an agency model.
That’s my point, Apple has significant market power in mobile device spend (around 80%). Part of the evidence against Apple was that Eddie Cue threatened to block Random House’s iPad app if they didn’t agree to terms. That’s right out of the MS playbook. Amazon has 65% of e-books and 30% of all books. Looking at the two, it’s Apple that has significantly more market power.
a great price? right.
Wasn’t this “price fixing conspiracy” the same agency pricing arrangement by which publishers had been dealing with retailers for decades?
Actually, publishers historically sold books to retailers for a fixed price and the retailer could then decide how much to make (or lose) on each sale. So Amazon or B&N would get each copy of book X for a fixed price and then the retailer had the independence to decide if they wanted to sell the latest best seller for a loss to bring people to the store. That’s why there’s little connection between the MSRP and the actual price. Amazon only moved to agency after the fix was in and prices went up. That’s the whole critique of Amazon, that they’re big enough to take the hit on e-books by selling many at a loss in a way that other retailers can’t.