DOJ

On Friday morning the Department of Justice filed its revised proposed injunction against Apple with the Federal Court. The modest modifications made to government’s proposal largely incorporate Judge Cote’s suggestions at a hearing earlier this month, tapering the impact on the sale of regular apps, staggering the renegotiation process with book publishers — starting after two years, and finishing four years from the final judgment, and reducing the mandatory period of the injunction to five years (from ten), with the possibility of extensions. The change that concerns publishers the most — their negotiated and court-approved settlements are voided with respect […]

As ordered, Apple and the Department of Justice submitted a joint letter to Judge Cote at the end of the day Monday that schedules a court hearing on August 27 at 2 PM to discuss their progress on a proposed injunction. Both sides also said they will submit letters concerning their respective positions on the scope of the injunction — which, for now, are as far apart as they can possibly get — by August 23. Separately, also on Monday, Judge Cote officially approved the government’s motion for entry of its proposed settlement with Macmillan, a week after granting preliminary […]

The tangled web of what the Department of Justice, the states, and the class-action plaintiffs now want from Apple was plainly evident at Friday afternoon’s court hearing, in which Judge Cote heard a number of thorny and complicated issues. Except for a swift dismissal of Apple’s conditional request to stay proceedings (she of course “didn’t believe Apple is likely to succeed on appeal”), Cote deferred the biggest decisions for later in the month. She did not decide on the DOJ’s proposed injunctive relief, contentiously and vociferously objected to by Apple and book publishers, and she did not commit to a trial […]

The court docket filled with new filings Thursday afternoon in advance of Judge Denise Cote’s Friday afternoon conference regarding proposals for an injunction against Apple. To the Publishers DOJ attorney Lawrence Buterman predictably but egregiously replied to the settling publishers’ complaint that the proposed injunction reneges on their long-negotiated, court-approved settlement. First he argues that Justice’s proposal “in no way seeks to modify” those settlements “or punish publisher defendants.” The injunction is all about Apple and “imposes no obligation” on publishers. Because Apple went to trial and was found guilty rather than settling, Buterman reasons, they have to get a […]

Attorneys for all of the settling publishers (Harper, Hachette, Simon & Schuster, Penguin Random House and Macmillan) jointly filed objections to the DOJ’s proposed injunction against Apple on Wednesday: “Under the guise of punishing Apple, they effectively punish the settling defendants by prohibiting agreements with Apple using an agency model.” (For the record, they filed together “solely for the convenience of the Court and in the interests of judicial economy.”) The fundamental arguments — and even some of the quotes cited — will be familiar to readers who remember our Monday post, About Last Week. The filing notes that Justice’s […]