Hachette Book Group says in a statement that “after much deliberation” they have “reluctantly agreed to join the settlement of this matter with the U.S. Department of Justice, and to begin the process of settling with the State Attorneys General.” But “Hachette was not involved in a conspiracy to illegally fix the price of eBooks, and we have made no admission of liability.” In a separate statement, HarperCollins also says the company “did not violate any anti- trust laws and will comply with its obligations under the agreement. HarperCollins’ business terms and policies have been, and continue to be, designed […]
Legal
Settling Publishers Are Allowed Modified Agency for Two Years That Could Limit Predatory Pricing
HarperCollins, Hachette Book Group and Simon & Schuster have settled the Justice Department’s lawsuit over agency ebook pricing, officially filed earlier Wednesday. Under the settlement, they promise for two years not to “restrict, limit, or impede an e-book retailer’s ability to set, alter, or reduce the retail price of any e-book or to offer price discounts or any other form of promotions to encourage consumers to Purchase one or more e-books.” They also “shall not enter into any agreement with an e-book retailer relating to the sale of e-books that contains a price MFN” during that period, and they will […]
Details From the DOJ’s Lawsuit
In their lawsuit against Apple and five agency publishers, the Department of Justice claims “the evidence showing conspiracy is substantial.” In the broadest terms, Justice charges that the defendants “shared their business information, plans, and strategies in order to formulate ways to raise retail e-book prices.” It appears that Justice is actually charging two separate conspiracies. The earlier one they say began “no later than September 2008” and involves a number of meetings regarding a possible “joint venture” to sell ebooks together as well as “telephone conversations and other communications in which they jointly acknowledged to each other the threat […]
Sargent: “Macmillan did not act illegally. Macmillan did not collude.”
Macmillan ceo John Sargent released a letter to the company’s authors, illustrators and agents explaining their position in declining to settlement the lawsuit filed Wednesday by the Department of Justice: “The charge is civil, not criminal. Let me start by saying that Macmillan did not act illegally. Macmillan did not collude.” As Sargent recalls poignantly, “It is … hard to settle a lawsuit when you know you have done no wrong. The government’s charge is that Macmillan’s CEO colluded with other CEO’s in changing to the agency model. I am Macmillan’s CEO and I made the decision to move Macmillan […]
DOJ Formally Sues Five Publishers Over Introduction of Agency; Settlement with Some Expected Later Today
As anticipated, the Department of Justice formally filed suit Wednesday morning in a New York Federal Court against the five original agency publishers and Apple. The suit claims that the parties colluded to introduce agency pricing: “Defendants’ ongoing conspiracy and agreement have caused e-book consumers to pay tens of millions of dollars more for e-books than they otherwise would have paid,” the filing alleges. Macmillan ceo John Sargent has acknowledged that his company has declined to settle and will fight the litigation. “Macmillan did not act illegally. Macmillan did not collude,” he wrote to the community. (See story below for […]
Settlement With Justice By Some Publishers Looms…Or Not
Since last week, people with knowledge of settlement discussions between book publishers using the agency model for ebooks and the Justice Department have said with authority that some kind of agreement might be imminent. Absent an actual settlement and final details of how it would work, we didn’t think there was a story there–given the weeks of stories elsewhere saying there might be a settlement soon. But the Justice Department apparently continues to keep the WSJ informed, fueling the presumption within publishing that they are trying to press in public a case that they have yet to close in private […]