top of page
If Apple had launched its music business as Judge Cote views how business negotiations are supposed to be conducted, there would be no iTunes store, no iPod, and probably no Apple as we know it. Judge Cote was openly biased against Apple before the ebook case began. She remains openly hostile to Apple now. Her predisposition shows limited knowledge of how new technology like the iPad comes to market. Apple has no choice but to appeal her ruling. But first it has to overcome her bias against, and lack of understanding of, how dramatically new technology and business operate. From Computer World: '[Judge] Cote also offered a potential remedy: Apple would be allowed to sign new contracts with the publishers, one at a time. It would have eight months to sign a contract with one publisher, then the next eight months to sign with another publisher, and so on. In this way, Apple would not be dealing with all the publishers at once, preventing more collusion, [Judge] Cote said.' Before Apple introduced the iPad, Amazon had a monopoly on ebooks. In my opinion, this case has less to do with protecting consumers or publishers, and more to do with protecting Amazon's business model. Whether that was the DOJ's intention or not, that is the result.
7/15/19, 2:13 AM
Hon. Denise Cote
Send reply to the comment poster:
note: comment poster will be able to reply directly to your email
bottom of page