Apple's Bid to Disqualify Antitrust Compliance Monitor Rejected - MacRumorsOpen MenuShow RoundupsShow Forums menuVisit ForumsOpen Sidebar
Skip to Content

Apple's Bid to Disqualify Antitrust Compliance Monitor Rejected

by

ibooks-iconThe U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in New York today rejected Apple's bid to disqualify antitrust compliance monitor Michael Bromwich, who was appointed to watch the company since it was found liable of conspiring with publishers to fix e-book prices a few years ago, reports Reuters.

"The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York said a lower court judge did not abuse her discretion in rejecting Apple's bid to disqualify Michael Bromwich as monitor, even though some of the company's allegations against him 'give pause.'"

In July 2013, Apple lost a significant e-book antitrust case that found the company to have colluded with publishers to raise the price of e-books. As a result, Apple was forced to submit to an external antitrust compliance monitor and $450 million fine as part of a settlement with several class action lawyers and state district attorneys. Last December, the lawsuit entered appeals court as Apple's attempt to overturn the ruling.

Top Rated Comments

Rocketman Avatar
145 months ago
I guess the appeals process is sufficiently opaque we will not see the result until a judge announces it. But to have Apple judged as "per se illegal" going in (of anti-trust), when Amazon had a 90% market share, and the book vendors were complaining about losing pricing rights to their own products, does not pass the smell test.

What Amazon did was akin to dumping.

That is per se illegal in this country.

Rocketman
Score: 7 Votes (Like | Disagree)
BigInDallas Avatar
145 months ago
What I always end up wondering with judgements involving hefty fines....in this case just under half a billion....is just where the hell does that money go???

Does it go to benefit anyone, a process, or just does it end up in some government slush fund?

it depends who wins the case. If Apple wins the case they quickly transfer it to off shore account in Ireland to avoid taxes:p
Score: 5 Votes (Like | Disagree)
CarlJ Avatar
145 months ago
So, deciding guilt ahead of time (because "innocent until proven guilty" is so old-fashioned), then picking your unqualified friend as overseer, and allowing him to charge outrageous rates for himself, plus a subordinate he hired who has at least some grasp of the subject matter (that your "expert" friend needs explained to him), and letting them demand meetings with various high-up company employees who had no connection whatsoever to the matter at hand (because that'll make him feel important), poking his nose in everywhere and generally conducting a witch hunt trying to find *something* to complain about...

That "gives pause"? But isn't illegal? Their response feels a bit like, "well, look, he's a good boy, and at least he hasn't killed anyone." And yet it's Apple that has done wrong (by trying to help the publishers break Amazon's monopolistic stranglehold on the industry), and not the prejudging judge and her "expert" friend.

smh.
Score: 5 Votes (Like | Disagree)
realeric Avatar
145 months ago
As a result, ebook price is going up. US government is protecting amazon, not consumers.
Score: 5 Votes (Like | Disagree)
145 months ago
……... then picking your unqualified friend as overseer, and allowing him to charge outrageous rates for himself, plus a subordinate he hired who has at least some grasp of the subject matter (that your "expert" friend needs explained to him), and letting them demand meetings with various high-up company employees who had no connection whatsoever to the matter at hand

This is the most important part for me. It just screams 'conflict of interest'.
Score: 3 Votes (Like | Disagree)
69Mustang Avatar
145 months ago
As a result, ebook price is going up. US government is protecting amazon, not consumers.

This is pretty uninformed. E-Book pricing has increased because Amazon recently re-signed contracts with the major publishers. Those contracts allow the publishers to set the price; not Amazon. Amazon's preferred e-book pricing is still $9.99. Amazon has even provided incentives to the publishers for keeping the prices lower.

The page now reads: This price was set by the publisher.

http://www.amazon.com/Wright-Brothers-David-McCullough-ebook/dp/B00LD1RWP6/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&sr=1-1&qid=1432830787

This is what we wanted right? We were clamoring to pay the $13 for e-books from the iBooks store. Now we can pay $13 everywhere. That's what I call a win-win.:rolleyes:
Score: 3 Votes (Like | Disagree)

Popular Stories

Liquid Glass App Store Feature

Apple Criticizes U.S. Antitrust Bill That Targets the App Store

Thursday June 11, 2026 2:49 pm PDT by
United States Senators Chuck Grassley and Amy Klobuchar this week reintroduced the American Innovation and Choice Online Act (AICOA) that targets major tech companies like Apple, and Apple is not happy to see it back. The bipartisan bill is reminiscent of the Digital Markets Act in the European Union, banning large platforms from favoring their own products or services, limiting competitors' ...
iCloud General Feature Redux

Apple Faces First Italian DMA Probe on iCloud Interoperability

Tuesday June 16, 2026 4:29 am PDT by
Italy's competition regulator said on Tuesday it had launched an investigation into Apple over its compliance with interoperability obligations as set out in the European Digital Markets Act (DMA). Under the DMA, Apple must ensure that third-party providers of consumer cloud services can interoperate effectively and free of charge with Apple's iOS and iPadOS software platforms. The rules...
iOS App Store General Feature Black

Apple Faces New App Store Complaint From Chinese Developers

Tuesday June 23, 2026 8:51 am PDT by
A group of 48 China-based iOS developers have filed an antitrust complaint against Apple with the country's market regulator over the App Store's commission rates, the South China Morning Post reports. The developers sent an open letter to China's State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR), alleging that Apple failed to deliver on a promise to offer the lowest commission rate to the...