Barnes & Noble, with assistance from counsel David Boies at Boies, Schiller & Flexner, has filed a formal objection to the proposed settlement in the agency pricing case. In an argument reminiscent of the Department of Justice’s objections that led to the rejection of the Google Books settlement, BN argues that the settlement imposes “overreaching regulatory provisions” that “will transform the [Antitrust] Division into a regulator” and that the penalties imposed are not remedies actually “sought or mentioned” in the lawsuit itself. They argue that DOJ actually seeks to engage in the settlement in the very behavior they prosecuted for: “The Division […]
Legal
Amazon Is Awarded Patent from 2008 Covering Digital Gifts
Amazon continues to display their prowess in acquiring patents for digital business processes. Back in 2008 the company thought to apply for protection for a method of giving digital presents–including ebooks, along with other digital entertainment products. As GeekWire reports, that patent was officially granted this Tuesday. The site notes that the original patent includes the possibility that a gift-giver could forestall payment until the recipient has actually claimed their digital gift though as a matter of practice, customers currently pay for Kindle gifts on purchase.
Judge Certifies Class In Google Case Yet Again; GSU Plaintiffs Propose Injunction; The Agency Index
Unsurprisingly, Judge Denny Chin agreed with his own ruling from 2005 and once again agreed to certification of the class of authors in the refiled Google Books infringement case–thus sentencing himself to potentially years more of administering this case. He also approved associational plaintiff status for both the Authors Guild and the American Society of Media Photographers. One shouldn’t read much into the ruling other than that the case will go forward all over again. In part, Chin used Google’s own actions against them: “Given the sweeping and undiscriminating nature of Google’s unauthorized copying, it would be unjust torequire that each […]
Letters to Justice: Kohn’s 55-Page Brief, and Bookseller Peter Glassman’s Argument
CEO of RoyaltyShare, co-founder of eMusic, and former general counsel of companies including Borland Software Bob Kohn has dispatched a 55-page letter to the Department of Justice objecting to their price-fixing complaint in what probably qualifies as the most interesting legal brief to emerge in this case so far–even though it’s technically just a letter. Kohn essentially offers a more thorough and artful explanation of why he believes the agency model was pro-competitive rather than anti-competitive than what the defendants themselves have provided. Without the burden (or evidence) to deny the allegations themselves, he argues in broad form that “something […]
Macmillan Says DOJ Suit Is Nothing But Slim “Circumstantial Evidence” and “Innuendo”
Macmillan’s initial answer to the Justice Department’s antitrust suit filed on Tuesday May 29 is less extensive on a point-by-point basis than Penguin’s response, but it is no less definitive in denying the government’s allegations. “Despite an extensive investigation including production of the e-mails, calendars, and telephone logs of Macmillan’s CEO and other senior management, extensive interrogatories, and two full days of deposition of Macmillan’s CEO…the lack of direct evidence of conspiracy cited in the Goernment’s complaint is telling.” They add that the case is “based entirely on the little circumstantial evidence it was able to locate during its extensive […]
Penguin Says Government “Sides With A Monopolist” In Long Answer to AntiTrust Suit
Publisher defendants Penguin and Macmillan filed their first answers to the Department of Justice’s antitrust law suit in Federal Court on Tuesday, with both companies categorically denying the charges. Most broadly, Penguin repeats its contention that it “did not conspire to fix the prices of eBooks with other publishers or with Apple. Penguin, at the invitation of Apple, independently negotiated and ultimately entered into a vertical distribution agreement with Apple.” They argue “a vertical distribution agreement is presumptively pro-competitive. New entry is presumptively pro-competitive. Broader distribution is presumptively pro-competitive. Lower barriers to entry are presumptively pro-competitive. Yet the Government intentionally […]