WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court has rejected an appeal from Apple Inc. and left in place a ruling that the company conspired with publishers to raise electronic book prices when it sought to challenge Amazon.com’s dominance of the market.
The justices’ order lets stand a ruling that found Cupertino, California-based Apple violated antitrust laws in 2010.
Apple wanted to raise prices to wrest some book sales away from Amazon, which controlled 90 percent of the market and sold most popular books online for $9.99. Amazon’s share of the market dropped to 60 percent.
The 2-1 ruling by the New York-based appeals court sustained a trial judge’s finding that Apple orchestrated an illegal conspiracy to raise prices. A dissenting judge called
Apple’s actions legal, “gloves-off competition.”
The Justice Department and 33 states and territories originally sued Apple and five publishers.
The publishers all settled and signed consent decrees prohibiting them from restricting e-book retailers’ ability to set prices.
To settle suits brought by individual states, Apple has agreed to pay $400 million to be distributed to consumers and $50 million for attorney fees and payments to states.
- Posted March 10, 2016
- Tweet This | Share on Facebook
Justices turn down Apple appeal over electronic books

headlines Macomb
- Macomb County Meals on Wheels in urgent need of volunteers ahead of holiday season
- MDHHS hosting three, free virtual baby showers in November and December for new or expecting families
- MDHHS secures nearly 100 new juvenile justice placements through partnerships with local communities and providers
- MDHHS seeking proposals for student internship stipend program to enhance behavioral health workforce
- ABA webinar November 30 to explore the state of civil legal aid in America
headlines National
- Bryanna Jenkins advocates for the Black transgender community
- ACLU and BigLaw firm use ‘Orange is the New Black’ in hashtag effort to promote NY jail reform
- Florida AG held in civil contempt for disobeying order; ‘litigants cannot change the plain meaning of words,’ judge says
- Barrister’s new mystery novel offers glimpse inside the Inner Temple
- Disbarment recommended for ex-Trump lawyer Eastman by State Bar Court of California panel
- Retired California justice faces disciplinary charges for allegedly taking too long to decide cases