Department of Justice Defends Price Fixing Settlement

POST

MAIL

Posted July 23, 2012 at 6:19pm by iClarified

After receiving over 850 public comments on its investigation on fixed ebook pricing, the Department of Justice has responded to Apple and others stating that it will continue with the investigation as planned. The DOJ also refutes those who claimed Amazon was simply creating a monopoly by stating the Antitrust laws were "enacted to protect competition, not competitors."

The Department goes on to say that while it found "lacking" evidence against Amazon, it still would not be enough to justify a conspiracy.

Even if there were evidence to substantiate claims of 'monopolization' or 'predatory pricing,' they would not be sufficient to justify self-help in the form of collusion.

While several publishers have already settled, the DOJ will surely have a long legal battle with Apple and others.

Read More via The Verge

Department of Justice Defends Price Fixing Settlement

Follow iClarified

Russell - July 24, 2012 at 11:02pm

The mission of the Antitrust Division is to promote economic competition through enforcing and providing guidance on antitrust laws and principles. Antitrust Laws The goal of the antitrust laws is to protect economic freedom and opportunity by promoting free and fair competition in the marketplace. Competition in a free market benefits American consumers through lower prices, better quality and greater choice. Competition provides businesses the opportunity to compete on price and quality, in an open market and on a level playing field, unhampered by anticompetitive restraints. Competition also tests and hardens American companies at home, the better to succeed abroad. http://www.justice.gov/atr/about/mission.html

Reply · Like

Russell - July 24, 2012 at 10:59pm

"Many critics of the settlements view the consequences of the conspiracyhigher pricesas serving their own self-interests, and they prefer that unfettered competition be replaced by industry collusion that places the welfare of certain firms over that of the public. That position is wholly at odds with the purposes of the federal antitrust lawswhich were enacted to protect competition, not competitors."