DOJ Seeks To Monitor Apple iBooks, iTunes In Proposal To Court

DOJ logoA couple of years ago, Apple took away the right of third-party book sellers on iOS devices to link through their apps to their online stores. Most prominent among these is Amazon/Kindle. The move was clearly anticompetitive, although consumers could still get to the Kindle store (and others) via the mobile Web.

Last year, the Apple store was sued by the US Department of Justice (DOJ) under the Sherman Act for conspiring to fix e-book prices along with five major book publishers: Hachette, HarperCollins, Macmillan, Penguin and Simon & Schuster.

Cupertino lost at trial and was found guilty. Now, the trial enters the damages/remedies phase. The DOJ also has settled with the individual publishers.

The DOJ is proposing a remedy to the court that it says will “halt Apple’s anticompetitive conduct, restore lost competition and prevent a recurrence of the illegal activities.” However, the proposed remedy extends beyond books into all the digital content Apple sells on iTunes.

The DOJ says it wants to prevent further anticompetitive behavior by Apple in the future. The DOJ’s proposal contains the following provisions:

  • Apple would be required “to terminate its existing agreements with the five major publishers with which it conspired  . . . and to refrain for five years from entering new e-book distribution contracts which would restrain Apple from competing on price.”
  • Apple could not enter “into agreements with suppliers of e-books, music, movies, television shows or other content that are likely to increase the prices at which Apple’s competitor retailers may sell that content.” (emphasis added)
  • Apple would also be compelled (for two years) to restore in-app links to “e-book retailers like Amazon and Barnes & Noble . . . allowing consumers who purchase and read e-books on their iPads and iPhones easily to compare Apple’s prices with those of its competitors.”

The DOJ is also proposing an external monitor to ensure compliance with the above remedies over the next several years.

Apple is likely to vigorously oppose both the idea of the external monitor and any extension of the remedy beyond the scope of e-books to iTunes broadly. The court will hear the DOJ’s proposal on August 9.

Postscript: Apple filed its response (embedded below) to the DOJ’s proposed remedy described above. As expected the company strongly opposes the prospect of long-term DOJ oversight and the expansion of that monitoring to content areas that have nothing to do with e-books:

Plaintiffs’ proposed injunction is a draconian and punitive intrusion into Apple’s business, wildly out of proportion to any adjudicated wrongdoing or potential harm. Plaintiffs propose a sweeping and unprecedented injunction as a tool to empower the Government to regulate Apple’s businesses and potentially affect Apple’s business relationships with thousands of partners across several markets. Plaintiffs’ overreaching proposal would establish a vague new compliance regime—applicable only to Apple—with intrusive oversight lasting for ten years, going far beyond the legal issues in this case, injuring competition and consumers, and violating basic principles of fairness and due process. The resulting cost of this relief—not only in dollars but also lost opportunities for American businesses and consumers—would be vast.

Related Topics: Amazon | Apple | Apple: iOS | Channel: Industry | Top News


About The Author: is a Contributing Editor at Search Engine Land. He writes a personal blog Screenwerk, about SoLoMo issues and connecting the dots between online and offline. He also posts at Internet2Go, which is focused on the mobile Internet. Follow him @gsterling.

Connect with the author via: Email | Twitter | Google+ | LinkedIn

Marketing Day:

Get the top marketing stories daily!  


Other ways to share:

Read before commenting! We welcome constructive comments and allow any that meet our common sense criteria. This means being respectful and polite to others. It means providing helpful information that contributes to a story or discussion. It means leaving links only that substantially add further to a discussion. Comments using foul language, being disrespectful to others or otherwise violating what we believe are common sense standards of discussion will be deleted. You can read more about our comments policy here.
  • RyanMJones

    if apple has to do this, shouldn’t walmart and target and k-mart also have to list their competitor’s prices in the store next to each product? I think bestbuy should also have a link on all their product pages to the same product at frys so customers can make sure they get the best price. Same thing, right?

  • gregsterling

    There is an argument to be made along those lines . . .

Get Our News, Everywhere!

Daily Email:

Follow Marketing Land on Twitter @marketingland Like Marketing Land on Facebook Follow Marketing Land on Google+ Subscribe to Our Feed! Join our LinkedIn Group Check out our Tumblr! See us on Pinterest


Click to watch SMX conference video

Join us at one of our SMX or MarTech events:

United States


Australia & China

Learn more about: SMX | MarTech

Free Daily Marketing News!

Marketing Day is a once-per-day newsletter update - sign up below and get the news delivered to you!