Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > News > Tech News > Unsent Jobs email deals blow to Apple in DoJ e-book case

Unsent Jobs email deals blow to Apple in DoJ e-book case
Thread Tools
MacNN Staff
Join Date: Jul 2012
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2013, 12:36 PM
 
As a result of an email written by former CEO Steve Jobs, Apple may have suffered a significant blow at the e-book antitrust trial being pursued by the Department of Justice. Fortune reports that the head of Apple's iBookstore, Keith Moerer, testified yesterday that Apple had never asked or pressured any book publisher into changing contracts with Amazon from a wholesale model to Apple's preferred agency model, in which publishers can dictate higher prices. Apple was "indifferent" to what model publishers used with Amazon, Moerer claimed.

Publishing executives had previously corroborated Moerer's views. One example is Macmillan's John Sargent, who testified that while he did present Amazon with an ultimatum to switch to the agency model, no one at Apple had asked him to do it. He also said that the Macmillan contract with Apple makes no reference to Amazon one way or another.

The Jobs email, presented yesterday by DoJ attorney Dan McCuaig, appears to contradict statements by both Moerer and the publishing executives. The message dates back to January 14th, 2010, and finds Jobs responding to a request from publishers that the price caps in the iBookstore contract be raised. "I can live with this," Jobs writes to Eddy Cue, the Apple executive who was handling e-book negotiations at the time, "as long as they move Amazon to the agent model too for new releases for the first year. If not, I'm not sure we can be competitive..."

Under examination by McCuaig, Moerer admitted that the email didn't reflect "indifference" on Apple's part. Apple's chief counsel, Orin Snyder, attempted to defuse the situation by saying the email was never sent, but the DoJ objected, and US District Judge Denise Cote ordered the comment stricken from the record.

Cue is scheduled to testify on Thursday. Until now Apple has enjoyed some success at the e-book trial.
( Last edited by NewsPoster; Jun 12, 2013 at 12:42 PM. )
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2013, 12:58 PM
 
An internal email, never sent, expressing a reluctance to Amazon maintaining the wholesale model. So where exactly is the smoking gun here? Where is the direct request from Apple to the publishers to pressure Amazon towards an agency model or else?
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: SF
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2013, 01:08 PM
 
Yeah. That's pretty weak. I don't see how an unsent message has any bearing on whether Apple pressured the publishers to fix prices. It's kind of stupid, really.
     
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2013, 01:14 PM
 
Just goes to show you how desperate they are. Steve Jobs was pissed at Amazon and had a bad thought or two. He even typed it up... but never sent it........

So the DOJ is now trying to make bad thoughts against the law.....!!!!!!!!! Scary!!
Reality, what a concept! :-)
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2013, 03:19 PM
 
There just might be a reason why this email was never sent, eh?
     
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Seattle
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2013, 05:20 PM
 
Other posters are right. The fact that this email remained unsent suggests Apple and Jobs was leery of pressuring the major booksellers. And to understand that, we need to realize the context. Apple hadn't released the iPad and had no ebook market share. It need these major publishers to sign up with it at a time when it had little to offer them but the possibility of competition with Amazon.
Author of Untangling Tolkien and Chesterton on War and Peace
     
MacNN Editor
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Maitland, FL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2013, 06:12 PM
 
Indeed, the fact that it was unsent should have excluded it from this trial entirely as hearsay. People write a lot of nonsense that they then don't send when they reconsider it. Why this was allowed in the first place is a mystery, and the fact that Judge Cote left it in shows she is still biased against Apple.

If someone -- anyone -- at the DOJ had written an UNSENT email that said "I can't wait to screw these Apple guys into the ground on this," would that have been allowed in?
_chas_
     
   
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:20 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2014 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2