A PYMNTS Company

US: Economists tell Apple eBooks judge she’s wrong

By  |  March 6, 2014

Two economists have filed briefs with the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in defense of Apple as the company appeals an earlier verdict that found it guilty of conspiring to fix eBooks prices, say reports.

    Get the Full Story

    Complete the form to unlock this article and enjoy unlimited free access to all PYMNTS content — no additional logins required.

    yesSubscribe to our daily newsletter, PYMNTS Today.

    By completing this form, you agree to receive marketing communications from PYMNTS and to the sharing of your information with our sponsor, if applicable, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions.

    Economists Bradford Cornell, from CalTech, and Janusz Ordover, from New York University, have filed an amici curiae brief with the appeals court and claims that Judge Denise Cote, who ruled against Apple, failed to consider the economics in the agreements made between Apple and the eBooks publishers.

    As summarized by reports, the brief also says most-favored nation clauses and price caps, which are part of the agreements made between Apple and the publishers that are in question, can actually facilitate market entry and boost competition; the court also erred when it found that eBook price hikes were equated to competitive harm.

    Whether the brief will make a difference in the appeals court’s ruling is uncertain.

    Apple appealed Judge Cote’s ruling last month. The US Department of Justice, which initiated litigation against Apple following an investigation, is expected to file its brief in May.

    Full Content: CNN

    Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.