In a decision that could reshape how books are sold on the Internet, a federal judge ruled that Apple Inc (AAPL.O) conspired to raise the retail prices of e-books in violation of antitrust law, and called for a trial on damages.
Cote said the conspiracy resulted in prices for some e-books rising to $12.99 or $14.99, when Amazon had sold for $9.99.
"The plaintiffs have shown that the publisher defendants conspired with each other to eliminate retail price competition in order to raise e-book prices, and that Apple played a central role in facilitating and executing that conspiracy," Cote said.
That's interesting because I have developed a couple of online book stores and a common gripe amongst authors is that other sites discourage authors from selling books for more than a few dollars by reducing their return, ie: paying the author less if the book price is higher.
Authors need to have control over what their book sells for and not those book sellers who are more interested in volume sales than the authors' livelihood.
So I have a huge problem understanding what the problem is with this story line because it's not up to anyone but the author and/or the book vendor what a book sells for!
So what if authors have a better chance to recoup a living from their efforts. Or are the complainants in this case those who don't give a damn as long as they something for almost nothing?
What would they say about some of our authors charging up to $300 and more for their books?