Court to Hear Bids by Amazon, Publishers to Dismiss Revived Price Fixing Case - Publishers Weekly

Today's trip into the Catosphere took Panzer to the Publishers Weekly site. With no digging at all in the posts he found one about Amazon and price fixing.

 

Let's see what happens this time.

According to Andrew Albanese's post, Amazon and the Big 5 publishers are being accused in court of ebook price fixing. This is a case which was dismissed in September of last year and has now been refiled. The case accuses Amazon and the Big 5 of working together and keeping the price of ebooks high. The case was dismissed last year for lack of evidence. Amazon's attorneys say the case hasn't changed and should be dismissed again.

 

Panzer says, "This little kitty is confused. Did they not listen the first time?"

 

Note: This is a medium length post. Bring a cup of tea and a muffin for your reading snack.

 

To read the post tootle over to Amazon and Big 5

Court Hears Amazon, Publisher Motions to Toss Price Fixing Conspiracy Lawsuits - Publishers Weekly

Today's trip into  the Catosphere took Panzer to the Publishers Weekly site. There he found a post about the lawsuit against Amazon and the Big Five Publishers for price-fixing..

 
According to Andrew Albanese's post, Amazon and the publishers are asking to have the lawsuits tossed out. The lawsuit says publishers are trying to set up a monopoly for Amazon. Amazon and the publishers' attorneys say it's ridiculous to say publishers would want to set up a monopoly for Amazon. In a second lawsuit, bookstore owners say publishers and Amazon are in a conspiracy to price-fix books. Amazon and publishers' attorneys say there is no evidence to support the claim as Amazon has had absolutely no contact with publishers. There are links included in the post to other information about the lawsuits.

 

Did you know cats can chortle?

Panzer says, "This little kitty wonders why they would think publishers would want to help their biggest enemy become a monopoly."

 

Note: This is a long-medium length post. Bring a large glass of iced tea and some chocolate-covered cherries for today's reading. If you plan to follow the links in the post, you will need to decide what to bring to eat and drink.

 

To read the post tootle over to Price-fixing Conspiracy Lawsuits

Lawyers Argue that E-book Price-Fixing Case Against Amazon, Big Five Publishers Should Proceed - Publishers Weekly

Today, Panzer found something floating in his water dish in the Panzermobile.  Pulling it out, he discovered it was a post about the price-fixing case involving Amazon and the Big 5 publishers. Panzer has been telling you about this court case since it started.

 

I don't understand any of it. Do you?

According to the post by Andrew Albanese, lawyers for the plaintiffs suing Amazon and the Big 5 publishers for price-fixing have filed a rebuttal to Amazon's and the Big 5's motion to dismiss the case. The plaintiffs' lawyers' submitted a 56 page filing alleging Amazon's contract wording is the basis for their case. The lawyers say the contract contains the same wording as the price-fixing case they (the lawyers) won against Apple and the publishers a few years ago.

 

Panzer says, "The whole case is giving this little kitty a headache."

 

Note: This is a long post. Bring a huge cup of tea and two muffins for today's reading selection. If you plan to follow the links in the post, bring a thermos of tea, six muffins, three brownies, three chocolate chip cookies (biscuits), and a blanket for a nap in the middle.

 

To read the post tootle over to Ebook Price-fixing Case

To read Panzer's previous post about the case tootle over to Publishers and Amazon 

Publishers, Amazon Ask Court to Dismiss 'Illogical' E-book Price-Fixing Suit - Publishers Weekly

Today Panzer made a trip to the Publishers Weekly site. There with a little digging in the posts our inquisitive kitty boy found one about the lawsuit against Amazon and the Big 5 publishers for price-fixing.

 

When the case is explained that way, it makes no sense.

In his post Andrew Albanese reports Amazon and the Big 5 publishers' lawyers have asked the court to dismiss the 'illogical' case. The Big 5 publishers are Hachette, HarperCollins, Macmillan, Penguin Random House and Simon and Schuster. Their lawyers say the case is 'illogical' because the case says Amazon and the publishers conspired through e-book price-fixing to make Amazon a monopoly. The lawyers say obviously the publishers wouldn't gain anything "from helping Amazon gain market power."

 

Panzer says, "If the case was held in my Kitty Court, I'd dismiss it."

 

Note: This is a medium length post. Bring a cup of tea and a muffin for today's reading selection.

 

To read the post tootle over to Publishers and Amazon

Plaintiffs Oppose Discovery Delay in E-book Price Fixing Case Amazon - Publishers Weekly

Panzer's day began with a trip to the Publishers Weekly site. There our traveling kitty pilot found a post about one of the lawsuits against Amazon mentioned in the day before yesterday's post.

 

According to Andrew Albanese's post, the plaintiffs in the case against Amazon and the Big 5 publishers have asked the judge not to grant the company's request to delay the discovery phase. Amazon has filed to dismiss the case against the company and wants the discovery phase stopped until the dismissal is decided. The judge has not decided how to rule on the discovery question yet. The plaintiff's case accuses Amazon and the Big 5 publishers of price-fixing. This is based on the most favored nations clauses in the contracts between Amazon and the publishers. The post includes several links to other information about the case.

It is a waste of my nap time.

 

Panzer says, "Hmm ... A delay makes sense to this little kitty. If the company does the discovery now and the case gets dismissed, that's a lot of wasted time and money."

 

Note: This is a short-medium length post. Bring a large glass of iced tea for today's reading. If you plan to follow the links in the post, you will need to decide what to bring to eat and drink during your reading.

 

To read the post tootle over to Amazon

Booksellers File Antitrust Lawsuit Against Amazon, Publishers - The Digital Reader

Today when Panzer was tootling around in the Catosphere he decided to make a stop at The Digital Reader. With just a little digging in the posts our favorite kitty boy found one about a new lawsuit against Amazon.

 

How many lawsuits can one firm file against Amazon?

According to the post by The Digital Reader site owner Nate Hoffelder, a lawsuit has been been filed against Amazon and the Big Five publishers by booksellers. Last month Panzer told you about the lawsuit against the company for ebook price fixing. The new lawsuit is for print book price-fixing.

 

Panzer says, "I don't understand any of this."

 

Note: This is a short post. Bring a small cup of tea for today's reading.

 

To read the post tootle over to antitrust lawsuit

To read Panzer's previous post tootle over to Amazon e-book case 

Amazon E-book Case Sprawls, Lawyers Propose Consolidation - Publishers Weekly

 Today's trip into the Catosphere took Panzer to the Publishers Weekly site. With a little digging in the posts our busy kitty found one about the Amazon ebook price-fixing case. Panzer told you about this court case back in January.

E-book price-fixing? How?

According to the post by Andrew Albanese, there are currently four different lawsuits accusing Amazon and publishers Hachette, HarperCollins, MacMillan, Penguin Random House and Simon and Schuster of ebook price fixing. Lawyers with the Hagens Berman law firm have asked the judge in the case to consolidate all four cases into one class action suit. The post includes links to other information about the price-fixing allegations.

 

Panzer says, "This little kitty doesn't understand how stacking cases to be able to ask for a class action suit can be common knowledge in the court system and acceptable."

 

Note:This is a medium length post. Bring a cup of cocoa and a muffin for today's reading selection. If you plan to follow the links, bring a thermos of cocoa and six muffins.

To read the post tootle over to Amazon ebook case 

To read Panzer's previous post tootle over to Amazon ebook dominance

Apple E-book Refunds to begin June 21 - PW

Panzer barely got to sleep for his after dinner nap when he got shaken out of his kitty bed by shouting and cheering coming from the Catosphere. Our sleepy little kitty pilot headed the Panzermobile out. Following all the noise took him to the Publishers' Weekly site. Panzer found the source of all the excitement was a post about Apple.

Okay. Back to sleep now.

According to the post by Andrew Albanese, Apple began giving out the ebook refunds from the court case they lost. Apple lost the price-fixing case and their appeal and were ordered to give refunds to purchasers of ebooks. The Apple refunds will be sent directly to buyers' accounts no matter where they purchased the ebooks.The credits will be paid to your account if you bought an ebook between April 1, 2010 and May 21, 2012.

Panzer says, "It's about time. That case went on for years."

Note: This is a shortish post. A cup of tea should be enough for today's reading selection.

To read the post, tootle over to Apple refunds

Supreme Court Rejects Apple's Appeal - PW (Publishers' Weekly)

Panzer was out tootling around in the Catosphere today, when the Panzermobile was buffeted by a huge gust of wind. Going in the direction the wind had come from, took our brave kitty boy to the Publishers' Weekly site. It took no digging at all to find a post about the results of Apple's petition to United States Supreme Court.

Panzer discovered the buffeting wind that hit the Panzermobile had actually been a collective sigh of relief. Our kitty boy told you back in January that Apple had appealed their conviction of ebook price-fixing to the U.S. Supreme Court. According to a post by Andrew Albanese, the Supreme Court rejected Apple's appeal, finally bringing the case to a close. This means Apple will now be responsible for paying $400 million in refunds to ebook buyers.

Okay. Clean up your mess now.

The case has stretched on since beginning in 2011, when Apple was first accused of ebook price-fixing. Since being found guilty of price-fixing in 2013, Apple has used every means their attorneys could come up with to avoid the court financial settlement. Now, in addition to the refund to ebook buyers Apple also will pay $50 million in legal costs to their attorneys.

Panzer says, "Hmm ... If you humans would have listen to this little kitty and paid the money to the ebook buyers three years ago, you could have saved most of those attorney fees."

Note: This is a long post with links to other posts included in it. You'll need a thermos of tea and six muffins for your reading. If you want to read Panzer's post from January too, add two more muffins.

To read the post about the Supreme Court decision, tootle over to Apple appeal

To read Panzer's post about Apple's appeal, tootle over to Apple Supreme Court appeal

 

Apple Fires Back at DoJ - Publishers' Weekly

Let me out of here.

Panzer was tootling around in the Catosphere when he noticed a pungent smell coming through the ventilation system. Following the odor took our fearless kitty pilot to the Publishers' Weekly site. Since a cat's nose can smell things seven times stronger than a human's nose, our kitty boy put on a gas mask before he left the Panzermobile. But even wearing the mask without any digging at all he discovered a post about the ongoing saga of Apple's price-fixing conviction.
 
According to the post by Andrew Albanese, Apple's attorneys have filed more paperwork (called a brief) with the Supreme Court again rebutting their original conviction of ebook price-fixing. After reviewing Apple's and the DoJ's briefs and the amicus briefs from seven of Apple's supporters, the Supreme Court will decide if they will accept Apple's appeal for consideration. If the Supreme Court does not agree to review the case, Apple's court fight should be over. However, if the Supreme Court agrees to hear the case, the Court could rule in favor of Apple (basically "not guilty of price-fixing"), in favor of the DoJ (basically "guilty of price-fixing") or send the case back to the lower courts to re-do (basically "a do-over").

Panzer says, "Note on the legal stuff: Look ... I'm a cat, not an attorney ... So all that human legal mumbo jumbo is just to best of what my kitty brain understands. Don't go into court and quote me ... Unless it's a cat court of course."

Note: One cup of tea for today's reading.

To read the post, tootle over to Apple

DOJ Gets Extension in Apple Case - PW (Publishers' Weekly)

Mom, that turkey was so good.

Now that Thanksgiving is behind us and Panzer has had a whole day to catch up on his naps, our kitty boy is ready to search for news for his friends. After waddling his way into the Panzermobile, Panzer discovered liftoff took longer than usual for some reason, but he finally made it into the Catosphere.

During a stop at the Publishers' Weekly site, our kitty pilot discovered a post about the next step in the Apple price-fixing case. Apple was found guilty of ebook price-fixing in 2013 by Judge Denise Cote ... and ... yes, the case is still in the news

According to the post at the Publishers' Weekly site by Andrew Albanese, before the Supreme Court decides if they will take Apple's case under review, the Department of Justice will be allowed to respond to the appeal. Since the response isn't due until January 2016 and the Supreme Court will have to review all the information, it will be a while before they decide if they'll review the case. So ... Panzer will still have a job reporting the Apple price-fixing news in 2016.

Panzer says, "Hmm ... Let me see. The verdict for this case was decided in 2013. It will be 2016 before the Supreme Court decides if they'll take the case. I wonder how much the attorney fees are by now?"

Note: One cup of tea should be enough for the original post, but there are links in the post to earlier ones so you may need a second cup.

To read the post, tootle over to Apple Appeal Case

Apple's Antitrust Monitorship is Over - Publishers' Weekly

Panzer's trip into the Catosphere today took him to the Publishers' Weekly site. After some digging around our kitty boy reporter found a post about the latest on the Apple price-fixing case.

According to Andrew Richard Albanese, monitor Michael Bromwich has finished his work with Apple. Judge Denise Cote had appointed Mr. Bromwich after Apple was convicted of ebook price-fixing charges. Mr. Bromwich was to oversee Apple and monitor their implementation of his recommended policies. This was to make sure they were in compliance with the court order not to engage in antitrust operations.

Just accept it, Apple. It's over.

Panzer says, "Finally. ... This has been dragging on for over two years now. ... Oh, but wait ... Apple can still appeal to the U. S. Supreme Court to have the conviction overturned. ... Maybe, it's not over yet."

To read the post, tootle over to Apple

Credits From Big 5 Settlement Being Dispensed

Finally. I almost gave up.

Panzer was tootling around in the Catosphere, when he heard some cheering and clapping. Our big inquisitive kitty followed all the noise to the GalleyCAT site. There he found a post by Dianna Dilworth that explains all the celebration.

As part of the U.S. federal court ebook price-fixing case settlement in 2013, the Big 5 traditional publishers (Hachette, HarperCollins Macmillan, Penguin and Simon & Schuster) agreed to make "credit" payments to purchasers of their ebooks. According to the post by Ms. Dilworth, these payments are now being dispensed to Amazon customers' accounts.

Panzer says, "It's about time."

Note: The post includes a link to the original Amazon post.

To read the post, tootle over to credits begin

Apple Loses Ebook Price-fixing Appeal

Just give up. It's not worth it.

Panzer was out in the Catosphere today when he heard a lot of loud teeth gnashing and fist pounding. Following all the noise lead him to the Publishers' Weekly site. There our brave kitty pilot found the latest news on the Apple price-fixing case.

According to a post by Andrew Albanese, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld Judge Denise Cole's 2013 ruling that Apple did participate in ebook price-fixing. This finding clears the way for Apple to be required to refund $400 million to ebook buyers.

But ... don't hold your breath.

Apple still has the right to appeal to the full Second Circuit Court of Appeals ... and beyond ... up the ladder to the Supreme Court.

Panzer says, "Geez. Just give it up. You humans are spending more money on attorney fees than you'd have to pay ebook buyers and in fines."

Note: This is an e-x-t-r-e-m-e-l-y l-o-n-g post. Bring a h-u-g-e cup of tea.

To read the full post, tootle over to Apple loses appeal

Apple Says Price-Fixing Is Okay

Trust me. It's for your own good.

When Panzer entered the Catosphere today, the Panzermobile started getting buffeted around. My big strong kitty pilot regained control and discovered it was raucous laughter that was causing all the steering problems. Following the trail of laugh bubbles lead my boy to The New Yorker site.

According to Vauhini Vara, Apple's lawyers' argument before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit is that Apple fixed prices to benefit ebook buyers. Apple (and the big six publishers) felt it was necessary to fix prices and force Amazon to match those prices. In that way Amazon would lose market dominance because of Amazon's low consumer-friendly ebook pricing.

Panzer says, "That's right. All you guys got together and raised your prices. It was for my own good to make me pay more."

To read the full post, tootle over to Apple

Apple E-book Price-fixing Appeal Continues

Just admit it.

Panzer got up from his noon nap today to bright sunshine. My adventuresome kitty hopped into the Panzermobile. Unfortunately, when he got into the Catosphere he ran into a hail of crying and yowling. Following all the noise got him to the Publishers' Weekly site. There he found a post by Andrew Albanese about Apple's upcoming appeal of their loss in their price-fixing case.

Back on December 2 my kitty reporter told you about Apple's appeal. The appeal will be heard before the Second Circuit Court of Appeals on December 15. In his post Mr. Albanese addresses the issues Apple's attorneys will argue to convince the court to overturn Judge Denise Cote's verdict in the original case. Then he addresses the Department of Justice's rebuttal to those issues.

Panzer says, "Just take the money you're giving your attorneys and pay it to the ebook buyers. It would save you a lot of money in the long run."

Warning: This is a v-e-r-y l-o-n-g post and you'll need more than one cup of tea to read the whole thing.

To read the post, tootle over to Apple E-book Appeal

Apple December E-book Appeal

Panzer took some time off from his Christmas shopping to stop in at the Publishers' Weekly site. He found a post there by Andrew Albanese about Apple's appeal of their price-fixing case.

Making a list; checking it twice ...

Apple lost the price-fixing case back in 2013. At that time Judge Denise Cote ruled for the Department of Justice that Apple had participated in price-fixing of ebooks. Apple's appeal is based on what they say was circumstantial evidence used by Judge Cote in making her decision. The appeal will be heard on December 15.

Panzer says, "Boy, Apple's attorneys are making a litter box full of money on this case. It's been dragging on for years."

Be warned: There are several links included in the PW post, so you better have a b-i-g cup of tea.

To read the post, tootle over to Apple Ebook Appeal

Apple's Price-Fixing Settlement Closer to Approval

Yes or No?

Panzer visited Publishers Weekly today. He was following up on some news he heard about Apple. No it's not news about the new phones or watch. This is news about Apple's price-fixing case.

The post at PW concerns Apple's proposed terms of the settlement of the case. Judge Denise Cote has issued preliminary approval of the settlement terms. My bad boy found out this is not her final judgement, however, and the case still continues.

There's a link to a website for information included in the post. The post is long enough it requires a small cup of tea while you're reading it.

Panzer says, "If you're one of the customers involved in this case and plan to 'opt out' of the settlement, you only have until October 31 to make that choice known."

To read the latest information on Apple's continuing price-fixing saga, tootle over to Apple settlement

More E-Book Price-Fixing Fallout

I promise. Not again.

Okay, Panzer did it again. He promised me he'd stay away from the Publishers Weekly site.

But ...

being a bad boy, he just had to break his promise.

So ...

He found a post there by Andrew Albanese that brings up another court case involving Apple and the big five publishers involved in the original price-fixing case (yes, Hachette Book Group is one of the big five). This case was brought by DNAML, Diesel eBook Store and BooksOnBoard. All three companies are no longer viable and are now suing for compensation.

Judge Denise Cote has ordered the three e-retailers, Apple and the big five publishers into mediation.

(Now, I have the keys to the Panzermobile, so my bad boy isn't going anywhere without me for a week.)

To read more about the latest in the price-fixing game, tootle over to mediation

Apple Settlement May Not Be Settled Says Judge

I thought the end was in sight.

Panzer just got a Reuters news flash about the proposed Apple ebook price-fixing case settlement and possible case reversal he told you about. The judge in the case has not accepted the settlement.

U.S. District Judge Denise Cote says she has serious reservations about the settlement. Judge Cote sites issues with the amount and terms of the settlement as well as other issues,

Panzer says, "Just when I thought it might end ... no such luck for this kitty."

To read the entire Reuters news story, tootle over to Apple Ebooks Settlement