Displaying items by tag: iBooks

We have been following the Apple price fixing trial over the last few weeks and have been very interested in some of the coverage that has been coming out. One of the biggest things that we have noticed is a tendency from nay press outlets to try and skirt over the issues. In particular many news sites are more than willing to completely absolve Apple of all guilt simply because the most damning emails the DoJ is using were draft emails from Steve Jobs. What is unusual about this is that many of these same sites were not willing to do the same During the Samsung V Apple trial (and also the Intel Anti-Trust case). It begs the question; why does Apple get the free pass? Still press bias or bad reporting aside the fact that these emails are drafts is really irrelevant. They show knowledge or and/or intent to set prices and force them onto a competitor.

Apple just will not give up in trying to get out of the pickle they are in over price fixing eBooks. Despite some pretty convincing evidence that Steve Jobs put together a new agency model with Apple at the head they are still claiming that Apple did nothing wrong. They are now trying to claim that the price of eBooks went down after their agreements with five publishers. They are also trying to throw the original publishers under the bus claiming they were already trying to hurt eBook sales long before Apple got involved.

In the last few days we have seen a couple of things that just might break the old business model of the MPAA and RIAA. The indicators are things like the decision that code is not physical property was pushed down by the 2d appeals court only a matter of days ago along with an increase in lobby presence by some media content providers (not the content owners) while the final piece of the puzzle is actually the US DOJ suite against Apple and a handful of book publishers for price fixing.