Apple Holds Firm As Publishers Settle With DoJ Over e-Book Pricing 129
Nerval's Lobster writes "The U.S. Department of Justice has just settled with book publisher Macmillan in an ongoing case over the price of e-books, bringing its number of settlements with big-name publishers up to five. Justice claims that those five publishers, along with Apple, agreed to 'raise retail e-book prices and eliminate price competition, substantially increasing prices paid by consumers.' Apple competes fiercely in the digital-media space against Amazon, which often discounts the prices of Kindle e-books as a competitive gambit; although all five publishers earn significant revenues from sales of Kindle e-books, Amazon's massive popularity among book-buyers — coupled with the slow decline of bricks-and-mortar bookstores — gives it significant leverage when it comes to lowering those e-book prices as it sees fit. But Justice and Apple seem determined to keep their court date later this year."
And those expensive E-books... (Score:5, Interesting)
DVD and Blu-Ray have DRM that's somewhat nonsensical, but the media are cheap. I can excuse some of the stupidity because I'm not paying a lot for it.
E-books are too expensive for not having a physical copy.
Re: (Score:2)
All three are not impossible to crack.
I just put shelves up for my books, as for the number i have book cases were too expensive. I pretty much either have to switch to ebooks or give up having any wall space not covered by books.
Re: (Score:2)
And you view this as some sort of problem?
Re: (Score:1)
Below cost?
Ebooks cost $0. Was amazon giving them away with money?
The first one costs something, the rest are copies that can be done for nothing.
Re: (Score:3)
So you're claiming Amazon got the right to sell these ebooks from the publisher for $0? Fascinating. I wonder how the publishers and authors planned to make any money like that.
Or maybe the publishers sold the books to Amazon from some non-zero price. That price would of course be a COST to Amazon, and if they sold the books to their customers for less than that amount then they sold them below cost.
Re: (Score:1)
Below cost?
Ebooks cost $0. Was amazon giving them away with money?
The first one costs something, the rest are copies that can be done for nothing.
Yeah, that first one costs tens of thousands of dollars. Booksellers have to maintain an entire digital infrastructure to distribute the product, they have to buy the books from publishers who have to spend considerable money per book for editing, packaging, graphic design and layout, etc. It costs a lot of money to produce and distribute professionally created books.
But under the wholesale model, Amazon buys both books and e-books from the publishers at a bulk rate and sells them to consumers for a price b
Re: (Score:2)
How much it costs to produce an item isn't really reflected in the price
And it isn't free for the additional copies either.
Re: (Score:1)
No you don't. Post the first copy online and take your machines down.
If you want to sell DRMed books, then you need that other crap. Even then though books have a cost of a few cents. So surely they are not being sold below that.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You can post it to piratebay for all I care. There is no need to collect a fee, this is again a want not a need. If you do want that then the price of the book is up to a couple cents per for every copy after the first one.
Re: (Score:2)
The cost of ebooks is not $0. You have to maintain a server farm to store, sell and distribute those ebooks.Those servers have to have power, cooling, networking, and floorspace. And you need people to maintain it all.
Which costs... basically nothing. You could fill all the e-books on Amazon onto a 1TB hard drive, so one rack of servers could handle redundant storage on redundant servers for many times more e-books than Amazon currently sells.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Way to go, DOJ! being a proxy pawn for a market manipulator.
Isn't that the norm?
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:And those expensive E-books... (Score:5, Insightful)
One of the things I'd like to see if the ability to transfer from one cloud service to another. Amazon has theirs, Google has theirs, other folks likewise have theirs. But I have no (legal) way to transfer an e-book out of say Amazon's service and into say Google's service if, for instance, I decide I want to use a different e-reader and move "my" licensed content. Can't do it. The only value I get out of e-books that is missing from physical books is the amount of books that can be stored on a small device and the ability to add more to that device from say a hotel room on a trip. However e-books have all the previously mentioned downsides - many of which people are very slowly becoming aware of.
Google gives instructions on moving their ebooks. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not only are they expensive, they are also not sold. They are licensed. This removes the ability to use the provisions of the first sale doctrine.
That's what the Publishers claim... doesn't mean it's true. As far as I know it hasn't been tested in court yet.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've noticed more and more Amazon eBooks, especially sci-fi books, being released without DRM. It's still very much in the minority, but at least it's happening.
Re: (Score:2)
I've noticed more and more Amazon eBooks, especially sci-fi books, being released without DRM. It's still very much in the minority, but at least it's happening.
I posted feedback to their help center a while back telling them that they needed to implement a DRM filter on their advanced search page, at least something like "DRM? Y/N". Yeah, right, I won't be holding my breath for it...
In the meantime, search Amazon for books from Baen or Tor, they're the only two major publishers I am aware of that have implemented a no DRM policy. Or better yet, buy direct from Baen [baenebooks.com]. Tor's supposed to have a store too [tor.com], but something seems to have gone awry there.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually I don't think baenebooks.com sells books directly anymore. Last time I was there they said that they were now using amazon.com as their ebook distributor.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually I don't think baenebooks.com sells books directly anymore. Last time I was there they said that they were now using amazon.com as their ebook distributor.
S'weird, cause I just bought their latest monthly book bundle [baenebooks.com]...the downloads don't seem to come through Amazon...and I can pay with PayPal...
I did notice, though, that Tor is selling on there as well, so maybe they just decided not to bother setting up their own store.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:And those expensive E-books... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Most places do not give you the right to sells your ebooks. Many times, you are not even supposed to loan them out. Aside from publishing and distributing cost, this is a reason that a ebooks are much sell valuable than print books and should be sold accordingly.
.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I don't think that eBooks really should cost much less than print book.
I guess it depends on your definition of "less"
I can get mass market paperbacks from B&N for 10% off the cover price. So I refuse to pay more than 10% off the cover price for an ebook. Yet ebooks are routinely equal to or more than the mass market paperback. Thanks to Apple
The big winners (from me at least) in this fiasco were independent authors. As that is pretty much all I read right now.
Re: (Score:2)
I've heard (too lazy to dig out a source) that printing physical books and shipping them to the retailer accounts for about 20% of the retail price. Publishers invest a lot of money in each book that they publish (the author's advance, editing, cover design, marketing and so on). They still have the mindset that shelf space is scarce, meaning that if a book doesn't show a profit within six months or a year of release, it probably never will, because it will have been kicked out of the front of the bookshop
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A hardcover is about $25 for a novel, a paperback is about $8.
Re: (Score:2)
A hardcover is about $25 for a novel, a paperback is about $8.
Paperbacks are much cheaper for a couple of reasons: 1. the materials; 2. they aren't as "new" so it's like they're on sale compared to the hardback. I don't know if it should be that way, but that's the way it seems to go. I will admit that the hardbacks do last longer, so perhaps the better materials should cost more. Personally, I prefer the paperbacks.
Re: (Score:2)
E-books are too expensive for not having a physical copy.
It is also not unheard of to have a higher (or very similar) price for an eBook. So sometimes they are literally too expensive.
Also, does the license automatically offer a non-DRM version if my new eReader is unable to support current format 20 years later?
Re: (Score:2)
The last book I bought, the DRM-infested e-book was $20 and the paperback was $12.
Either publishers have no clue, or they're trying to keep selling paper books rather than e-books. The funny part is that by demanding DRM on the e-books Amazon sell, they're helping to tie Amazon customers to their Kindles so they can't buy from other stores.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
eBooks are 100% about convenience, and 0% about price. It's instant gratification.
That is obviously nonsense, or people wouldn't be selling so many $0.99 e-books and this case wouldn't exist because Amazon wouldn't have been cutting prices on e-books to sell more.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure why you'd think people are buying Kindles to get cheaper books, but it just isn't true, and that's not the attraction.
Uh, let's see. Maybe it could be because I know a ton of Kindle owners and many of them bought those Kindles to get cheaper books?
Re: (Score:1)
What you're describing is short-attention-span quick gratification. Books for the twitch-twitch market.
Re: (Score:1)
eBooks are 100% about convenience, and 0% about price
For you maybe. I like my ebook because it is convenient, and when I bought it, ebooks were cheaper. Then Apple decided to screw the customers over.
I've already payed several hundred dollars for the convenience when I purchased my reader. I don't also need to pay that for each book
don't forgot you also loss the convenience of reselling your book
Re: (Score:1)
Wow! I could almost afford an eBook!
compete with paper (Score:2)
Which is to say I think that I don't think that the price is the critical factor here. Over time we are going to see more open sales and less lockin. This will happen as publishers depend less on printing
Re: (Score:3)
I rent ebooks...
FTFY.
Re: (Score:2)
I rent ebooks...
FTFY.
And, oddly enough, I still pay a full purchase price for that rental service (sometimes higher than the cost of a paper copy)
Re: (Score:2)
I rent ebooks...
FTFY.
And, oddly enough, I still pay a full purchase price for that rental service (sometimes higher than the cost of a paper copy)
Precisely why I have a standing ban on ebooks. That is, until I can get my automatic book scanner built [wired.com]
Re: (Score:3)
I dunno. I've bought books from Apple's store. They come as an unencrypted epub file which I can happily read on pretty much any modern eReader.
Publishers should be able to price their product.. (Score:2)
Publishers should be able to price their product at whatever levels they want. They got into trouble when they got together to agree on set prices.
Ebooks are an interesting thing. The Apple and Kindle Ebooks seem to be licenses to view the content, unless you illegally break the DRM of the content and load it into callibre or a similar software. You can't buy an ebook and then sell it when you are done. You can't buy a used ebook :)
Physical textbooks are getting that way too, coming with 1 time licenses
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, some Amazon eBooks don't have DRM. I still don't think you're allowed to sell them when you're done, though.
It was worse than that (Score:2, Informative)
They were agreeing on a set agency pricing.
See normal pricing is wholesale, meaning that I decide what I need to charge for a product, and I sell it to stores for that much (usually with quantity discounts). Then the retailer is free to price it as they wish. They can mark it up a ton and try to make big unit profits, they can sell it at a loss as a loss leader. I am happy either way because I am getting what I want per copy.
Agency pricing is different. Here the manufacturer tells the retailer what price th
Re: (Score:1)
It's pretty rare overall (Score:2)
I'm not saying you never see it, the audio world likes it to an extent, Denon does it, but it is not very common. Most manufacturers decide what they want to make per unit and price accordingly. What the retailer does is of no concern to them.
Agency pricing is legal, but not to collude on it.
Re:It was worse than that (Score:4, Insightful)
Agency pricing is pretty scummy period in my opinion, and is fairly rare. Here not only was it being done, but as a collusion.
Apple has so far sold 25 billion songs, all with agency pricing. Record companies set the price, and Apple sells it. The same things with books. Apple sells tens of thousands of different ebooks. They don't want to worry about what price to set for each book. So they let the publisher set the price; the publisher has more experience anyway.
Now apparently Apple told the publisher: If you sell the same book to other distributors for less, then we are not interested. Can't see anything wrong with that.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Publishers should be able to price their product at whatever levels they want.
Distributors should be able to price their product at whatever levels they want.
It's one thing for a publisher to set the price when they sell to a distributor. It's quite another thing for publishers to dictate the price when a distributor sells to a consumer.
Re: (Score:2)
Publishers should be able to price their product at whatever levels they want.
You are right. But publishers shouldn't be able to specify the price the middle sales to the public.
Mess! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Which works great if you don't spend a lot of time traveling. Or have a huge house.
Personally, I use the library and only buy books that I'm going to want for years to come.
Re: (Score:2)
Buy? Pffff. (Score:1)
There's a much better way to avoid being gouged for books. Pirate.
Ebooks are tiny and there is apparently a quite active ebook piracy scene. You can find torrents that are VAST archives of thousands of books (of just one genre!) and they're smaller than your average HD movie rip.
The ebook prices publishers put forward are an absurd, laughable fantasy designed to protect their old business models as long as possible. (And to foster the idea that their high prices are somehow normal)
I can get 10-12 dollars fo
Downside (Score:3)
On the other hand, given the egregious awards for downloading just a few movies or songs - imagine the financial penalty for a collection of a thousand books.
Everyone is just lucky the book industry is not going after pirates the same way the music industry has.
Re: (Score:2)
On the other hand, given the egregious awards for downloading just a few movies or songs - imagine the financial penalty for a collection of a thousand books.
Everyone is just lucky the book industry is not going after pirates the same way the music industry has.
Yeah, that worked out so well for the music industry
Lose / Lose (Score:2)
It doesn't matter how little it has helped the music industry. What matters is that the music industry has destroyed quite a few lives. And the publishing industry COULD do the same if it chose, I would be wary of putting myself into the middle of a very likely action.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, that's a solution... if you have no scruples whatsoever.
Re: (Score:1)
Scruples? No, if you're opposed to ebooks it's a good way of fighting back.
Destroy the market for ebooks and publishers will give it up.
A DVD-R holds a hell of a lot of books that you can hand around to friends and strangers.
Apple trying to protect the market from Amazon (Score:2)
Really this case has a lot more depth to it than just the old Apple/Aamazon angle. Everyone shoudl read more details as to what this is all about. [time.com]
It was about the publishers (and Apple) trying to keep the market more open to competition - an excerpt:
"While the deal caused prices to go up for some new releases and bestsellers, according to Schumer, the average ebook price actually went down from $9 to $7....It was actually Amazon - not Apple or the publishers - that held too much market power and was using
Re: (Score:2)
It was about the publishers (and Apple) trying to keep the market more open to competition
Do you really believe that? If so, I have some ocean side property to sell you in Arizona...
Apple and the publishers did this to make money (as much of it as possible) and didn't think anyone would notice their backroom dealing.
Re: (Score:1)
Yep. They're out to make as much money as possible by *DROPPING* the average price by $2.
Reading comprehension for the win!
Re: (Score:1)
Yep. They're out to make as much money as possible by *DROPPING* the average price by $2.
Reading comprehension for the win!
Maybe you should take a look at who made that $2 claim that you are spouting off as fact. Who made it again? Senator Charles Schumer made that claim in an op-ed to the Wall Street Journal. The SAME Charles Schumer that has taken at LEAST $100k in legal bribes (campaign contributions) from the book industry according to latest figured released [opencongress.org].
Maybe you have a reliable source for that $2 claim that isn't getting kickbacks from the same industry?
Re: (Score:2)
Reading comprehension for the win!
Ummm you might want to take a reading compression course – or maybe some high school math. You have been misled or tricked. The article never mentions revenues or profits.
Bestsellers increase in price while other books now sell for less. If Amazon sold the same number of “Bestsellers” as all other books then yes, revenue would decline. However, if “Bestsellers” are their best sellers – which is a reasonable assumption – you can no longer say that. Now, pulling Amazo
Re: (Score:2)
Why not? They
Wanted to keep the market open
They wanted to shift power away from distributions (dominated by Amazon)
They wanted to gain control of retail price of their books. (End discounting of their books, have 1 day specials to promote their books, etc)
Multiple motivations can drive the same actions.
Same motivation (Score:3)
Apple and the publishers did this to make money
Of course they did.
Because Amazon destroying all other publishers means they make very little money. But do you think that's better, or worse for readers?
Amazon charging less so they can lock the whole market into the Kindle platform for eBooks is not exactly an altruistic move either you know.
Apple the open platform. (Score:2)
Apple and the publishers did this to make money
Of course they did.
Because Amazon destroying all other publishers means they make very little money. But do you think that's better, or worse for readers?
Amazon charging less so they can lock the whole market into the Kindle platform for eBooks is not exactly an altruistic move either you know.
You mean instead of *middle men* bleeding artists dry, and electronic store fronts taking massive mark-ups on Authors Books. That sounds wonderful.
As for the whole kindle thing. I'm pro a move to open devices and formats, and look forward to Apple relinquishing its patents on its closed formats [and it embracing open ones flac and webm being good starts] , and opening its devices to Alternative store-fronts *including* kindles who currently use a web-app :)
I Agree with you I think boycott Apple until they o
Re: (Score:2)
You mean instead of *middle men* bleeding artists dry, and electronic store fronts taking massive mark-ups on Authors Books.
Apple also encourages individual authors. They even write book writing software and give it away for free. Then they let you charge whatever you want for your book.
You can also try to sell through Amazon but it's up to Amazon whatever price below your base price they want to charge.
What is a Cartel? (Score:2)
It was about the publishers (and Apple) trying to keep the market more open to competition - an excerpt:
Bless you sweetness, you do know that this is nothing to do with *competition*...its the opposite of competition its a cartel. As for Apple...because you don't really care about the publishers is in it for "most favored nation", that means *nobody* can compete on price with Apple.
In fact this is anticompetitive....its why the DoJ is breathing down Apples Neck
Re: (Score:2)
Blatant collusion in price-fixing is illegal, and screaming "But Amazon!" doesn't change that.
And, oh, my, Senator Schumer of New York says things that support New York-based publishers in a dispute with Washington-based Amazon? Next up, we'll ask congressmen from West Virginia what they think about nuclear power as an alternative to coal; it'll be just as reliable.
Or buy Indie... (Score:2)
Something like Spotify for books would be nice... (Score:1)
The library has always been my first choice for books, but something like Spotify for books would move the library to 2nd...
Re: (Score:2)
My libary lends e-books.
Also, doesn’t Amazon Prime kind of do this – letting you lend 1 book a month?
Boycott Apple and all ebooks (Score:1)
Both are total rip-offs.
Prices (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
apple entered into an agreement with the publishers to fix prices of ebooks and kill their competition's business model. That's the issue at hand.
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
No they didn't. I repeat, the ebook business model is exactly the same as the app store model. It's not something new and devious devised by a conspiracy.
Re:Of course Apple are going to take it to court. (Score:5, Informative)
You are right – but you are also missing the point.
There are 3 major players: the publishers, the distributors (Apple or Amazon), and the customers.
Amazon’s Kindle used a distributor’s model. Amazon would buy the book at a fixed price from the publisher but would set the retail price. They could, and did, sell books at a loss, to promote the Kindle.
Apple uses an agency model. The publishers set price and then negotiates the percentage the retailer (Apple) keeps. It is alleged that Apple and the publishers colluded to break Amazon’s near monopoly.
The agency model shifts power away from the distributors to the publishers. As you say this model has been around for a long time – so why care?
What makes it a Federal case is that (allegedly) this raised prices for consumers. Why? Because now all bookstores sell the same book for the same price, so bookstores are no longer competing on price. It shifts power away from customers to the publishers, resulting in higher prices.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
But Amazon is selling books at prices across the board that are unprofitable and accusing anyone charging higher prices of gouging. They are actively trying to destroy other distributors and bring publishers under their thumb. This is going to hurt consumers in the long run because destroying publishers and distributors ability to make a profit will result in fewer books getting published. Consumers will have fewer books to choose from and fewer venues in which to shop for them.
I'm absolutely amazed that fo
Re: (Score:2)
Do 2 wrongs make a right?
There are Slashdotters who value fairness, reject sloppy logic, guilt by association, and broad generalizations.
Was Amazon selling best sellers at a loss as a loss leader? They wanted to generate overall excitement and get people to visit the store and buy Kindles. Or was this to crush book stores – which were already in decline.
If true, and I think there is more than a smidge of truth in those accusations, then Amazon should be brought on a lawsuit for it’s failings. Gi
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Publishers only provide benifit to authors in the print world.
No, that would be printers. Publishers commission, give advances, provide editors, provide promotion, provide a brandname, get books reviewed by the important reviewers etc.
They are every bit as important as signing to a label is for a band. You can record your own CD of music and put it up for sale on the web without a record label. But it almost certainly won't see beyond your friends and family. Same goes for ebooks.
So they intentionally raised prices to slow digital down. And they used an agreement that made sure other publishers did the same.
No, if they wanted to slow digital down they'd just not do digital. They like digital, it
Re: (Score:1)
But Amazon is selling books at prices across the board that are unprofitable and accusing anyone charging higher prices of gouging. They are actively trying to destroy other distributors and bring publishers under their thumb. This is going to hurt consumers in the long run because destroying publishers and distributors ability to make a profit will result in fewer books getting published. Consumers will have fewer books to choose from and fewer venues in which to shop for them.
I'm absolutely amazed that folks here on Slashdot who claim to value freedom, etc, are actually cheering Amazon's attempt to build a monopoly. Has everyone's hatred for Apple really blinded them that much to what's going on here?
Consumers were hurt when Apple colluded with publishers to raised prices for ebooks. The wrong solution is to form a cartel between Apple and publishers.
Re: (Score:1)
There's no evidence that Apple colluded with publishers in this way.
Re: (Score:1)
Almost. It shifts power away from distributors to the publishers.
In neither the Amazon nor the Apple model is the customer the one with power. Amazon is using its weight to crush competing bookstores. Apple tried to use its weight to stop Amazon, which actually would have eliminated the Amazon price advantage and made it possible for multiple bookstores to run digital versions, because they'd have to compete on things other than trying to match Amazon's negative margin.
Amazon's unfairly low prices hurt c
Re: (Score:3)
The problem was not Apple's app store model. The problem was that Apple allegedly colluded with the publishers to raise the prices of ebooks in other stores. With iPhone and iPad apps, it didn't matter so much, because the Apple store is the only officially-sanctioned source of those. I guess Apple didn't like the thought of having to compete on price with other ebook retailers...
Re: (Score:1)
The problem was that Apple allegedly colluded with the publishers to raise the prices of ebooks in other stores.
And it's nonsense. Apple has no ability to set prices for other stores. That is between the publisher and those other stores. Apple doesn't even set prices for their own store.
All Apple did was use exactly the same model they used for it's App Store. It'd be surprising if they didn't. It's not some fiendish plot.
Apple will let it go all the way to court because they have done nothing wrong.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
That's why there is such a "to do" about this. It's not the way things normally work and that's why the DOJ has brought the lawsuit about.
Re: (Score:1)
You don't seem to understand. You're right, Apple shouldn't have the ability to set prices for other stores, but what they did was get the publishers to agree that they wouldn't allow other stores (aka: Amazon) to sell for prices less than Apple.
There's absolutely no evidence of Apple being involved in a cartel.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
But that isn't the issue:
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/378679/apple-settles-with-eu-on-ebook-probe
European Union regulators ended an antitrust probe into ebook prices, accepting an offer by Apple and four publishers to ease pricing restrictions on Amazon and other retailers. The decision hands online retailer Amazon a victory in its attempt to sell ebooks cheaper than rivals in a fast-growing market publishers hope will boost revenue and customer numbers. The European Commission said the concessions from Appl
Re: (Score:2)
Look at the Apple vs. Samsung trial. Apple *owns* the US 'justice' system.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, they own the US justice system, and yet it is the EU courts that produced a pretty scathing opinion of Samsung's abuse of FRAND patents.
But let's not let facts get in the way of a good conspiracy.
Re: (Score:2)
Look at the Apple vs. Samsung trial. Apple *owns* the US 'justice' system.
Whatever your opinion of that trial, it's tough to argue that Apple "owns the U.S. justice system". It was just last year that Apple got smacked down pretty hard in their case against Motorola.