In a new court filing obtained by AllThingsD, Apple berates the DOJ's revised proposed e-book remedies calling them a “broadside masquerading as a brief” and a “transparent attempt effort to attack the credibility of Apple and its counsel, and obtain an injunction wildly out of proportion to the issues and evidence in the case.”
Apple is asking the court to order the DOJ to withdraw it and submit one that addresses issues actually adjudicated in court.
“Plaintiffs devote much of their brief to seeking to justify an injunction directed at Apple’s unilateral dealings with Amazon (and other e-book retailers) in its App Store, an issue that the plaintiffs did not pursue at trial. Plaintiffs are seeking a remedy that would give Amazon significant competitive advantage over Apple — an advantage it is neither entitled to nor deserves.”
The DOJ wants Apple to allow links to third party e-book stores from within e-book apps without forcing them to pay fees. Apple doesn't want the DOJ telling them how to run their App Store. They also don't want an external monitor which they argue “exceeds the bounds of even criminal price-fixing cases.”
“Apple does not believe it violated the antitrust laws, and, in any event, the conduct for which the Court found it liable has ended and cannot recur as a result of the publishers’ consent decrees. In light of these facts, no further injunction is warranted.”
Judge Denise Cote is set to meet with Apple and the DOJ today to discuss the filings.
Read More
Apple is asking the court to order the DOJ to withdraw it and submit one that addresses issues actually adjudicated in court.
“Plaintiffs devote much of their brief to seeking to justify an injunction directed at Apple’s unilateral dealings with Amazon (and other e-book retailers) in its App Store, an issue that the plaintiffs did not pursue at trial. Plaintiffs are seeking a remedy that would give Amazon significant competitive advantage over Apple — an advantage it is neither entitled to nor deserves.”
The DOJ wants Apple to allow links to third party e-book stores from within e-book apps without forcing them to pay fees. Apple doesn't want the DOJ telling them how to run their App Store. They also don't want an external monitor which they argue “exceeds the bounds of even criminal price-fixing cases.”
“Apple does not believe it violated the antitrust laws, and, in any event, the conduct for which the Court found it liable has ended and cannot recur as a result of the publishers’ consent decrees. In light of these facts, no further injunction is warranted.”
Judge Denise Cote is set to meet with Apple and the DOJ today to discuss the filings.
Read More