Apple hit with US injunction in ebooks antitrust case
A US judge who found Apple conspired to fix ebook prices imposed new restrictions on the iPad maker.
New York: A US judge who found Apple conspired to fix ebook prices imposed new restrictions on the iPad maker on Friday, limiting its agreements with publishers.
US District Judge Denise Cote in New York also said she would appoint an external monitor to review Apple's antitrust compliance policies, procedures and training for two years.
The injunction was narrower than the US Justice Department had sought, in line with Cote's statement last week that she wanted it "to rest as lightly as possible on how Apple runs its business."
The department had sought a broader injunction that could have affected Apple's agreements with suppliers of movies, music and TV shows.
Cote ruled on July 10 that Apple was liable for conspiring with five publishers to raise e-book prices above those established by the dominant retailer in the market, Amazon.com Inc.
The five publishers, all of which have settled with regulators, include Lagardere SCA's Hachette Book Group Inc, News Corp's HarperCollins Publishers LLC, Penguin Random House LLC, CBS Corp's Simon & Schuster Inc and Verlagsgruppe Georg von Holtzbrinck GmbH's Macmillan.
The terms of Friday's judgment will expire after five years, but Cote's order allows for extensions in one-year increments if necessary.
The Justice Department welcomed the injunction.
"Consumers will continue to benefit from lower e-book prices as a result of the department's enforcement action to restore competition in this important industry," Assistant Attorney General Bill Baer said in a statement.
Apple said it would appeal the injunction.
"Apple did not conspire to fix e-book pricing," said company spokesman Tom Neumayr. "The iBookstore gave customers more choice and injected much-needed innovation and competition into the market."
Apple's shares rose 0.6 per cent to $498.22 on Friday.
It faces a separate trial on damages demanded by states that are pursuing related claims.
The case is US v. Apple Inc et al, US District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 12-02826
- US Presidential Debate: Bollywood Stars Share Their Opinions on Twitter
- US Presidential Debate: Clinton and Trump Spar on Economy and Jobs
- Some Reactions Around the World To First Trump-Clinton Debate
- US Presidential Debate: Why Donald Trump's Sniffles Had Internet Choking
- We Did Discuss About Removing Dhoni From Captaincy: Sandeep Patil
- Don't Believe in Biopics On Cricketers: Gautam Gambhir
- Gautam Gambhir Bats for Taking Test Cricket to Smaller Towns
- Spinners Will Decide Fate of India-New Zealand Test Series, Feels Gautam Gambhir