rss rss rss
  • Home
  • About
  • Contact Us
  • Submission Policy
  • Back Issue Archives
  • Editors and Staff
  • Alumni
ebook
Apple, Books, Technology // Apr. 28, 2012 // by Malhar Naik // 0 Comments

Government Seeks to Throw The Book at Apple and Major Publishers

Ipad or Kindle?  This is a question many avid readers debate as they enter the modern world of reading.  My memory of reading as a kid was sensory and tangible: flipping dog-eared, yellowing pages at the library; savoring the smell of a new hardcover book as I attempted to earn my free “Book It” pizza.  The advent of tablets and e-readers has created a market of gadgets to read more.

Today, how we read transforming.  E-readers and e-books are a fast booming industry with the assurance of making reading more convenient, and, more importantly, cheaper.  But it seems like the promise of affordable prices has not been kept.  While sales of iPads, Kindles and other e-readers have risen, so have prices of e-books for those devices.   Also, as the marketplace for e-books has evolved so have the conflicts between competitors, specifically accusations of collusion.

The results of the U.S Justice Department’s recent civil suit against Apple and five of the nations biggest publishers may settle these tensions, if it makes a decisive verdict regarding charges of colluding to raise e-book prices.  The justice department alleges that the CEOs of publishing companies had “secret meetings” in Manhattan’s high life restaurants to plot to work with Apple to raise the “wretched $9.99” price point set up by e-book pioneer Amazon.com.  While Hachette, HarperCollins, and Simon & Schuster have decided to settle their cases, Apple, Macmillian, and Pearson PLC’ Penguin Group have decided to charge on to trial.

Are e-books really overpriced?  The government claims e-books went up an average of $2 to $3 in a three-day period in 2010.  Is this part of Apple’s plan to join forces with publishers to sabotage Amazon?  The answer requires a bit of history in the evolution of e-books.  When books moved from hard book cover to an online medium the natural perception among consumers was that prices should be much cheaper considering there is no cost for warehousing, shipping, printing and binding e-books.  CNET writer Nathan Bransford, however, astutely points out an overlooked fact in the debate, “Paper doesn’t cost very much.”  E-books actually do not save publishers from their biggest expenses, namely compensating authors, designing and marketing the book, and other necessary overhead.

In fact, publishers are not saving much money.  Consumers, however, were paying less than half for books on average ($24.99 vs. $9.99).  When e-books first arrived on the market publishers sold the books on a “wholesale” model.  Publishers would sell for half of a “list price” they sell to vendors such as Amazon.  In exchange, vendors were allowed to sell to the market at their own price.  Amazon’s strategy at the time was to pay $12.50 per copy and then sell the e-book on the market for a loss at a discounted rate of $9.99.  This loss leader pricing strategy was instituted in hopes of selling more kindles and to establish a strong foothold early in the e-book marketplace.  Publishers, however, were troubled by the discounted pricing and preferred for more competition to increase prices and break Amazon’s tremendous leverage over the market.  Bransford also points out publishers became concerned that Amazon was devaluing consumers notion of what a book really should cost.  

In 2010 Steve Jobs and Apple came to the playing field with the iPad.  He sought to break down the barriers of entry into the marketplace by changing the rules of the game.  Apple approached book publishers with an “agency model.”  Under that model the publishers set the final consumer price and retailer and vendors get a commission for the sale, around 70%.  They even went as for as to impose the model on Amazon as well.  Even by raising the consumer price $12.99 publishers, however, were actually making less per book than they would by charging 50% of their list price under the “wholesale model.”  Nonetheless, publishers were willing to shoulder this loss in order to allow competitors to enter the e-book marketplace, thereby solving the “Amazon $9.99 problem.”  This competition has allowed prices on e-books to rise, in some cases even higher than a print version.  Coincidently Mike Shatzkin, seems to implicate that the market for e-books has slowed for major publishers while the market for print books has stabilized.  While Shatzkin has not identified a cause, Bransford implies it could be due to agency pricing.  This would be a big win for publishers since they make a bigger margin on print books.

The question is, was this a natural evolution of the e-books marketplace or did Apple and the major book publishers orchestrate this master plot?  Steve Jobs explained to writer Walter Isaacson in his biography,  “[w]e told the publishers, ‘We’ll go to the agency model, where you set the price, and we get our 30 percent.  And yes, the customer pays a little more, but that’s what you want anyway.’”  The government alleges that the key to forging this plan work was constant communication and pacts of solidarity between the major publishing companies to make assurances to destroy Amazon’s $9.99 pricing problem together.  Only one publisher attempting to force the agency model would risk losing massive sales if Amazon dropped them.  The government alleges, “publishing executives knew what they were doing was wrong and took steps to conceal their communications with one another, including instructions to ‘double delete’ email.” Led by Macmillion CEO John Sargent the publishers forced the agency model together on Amazon or threated to take away their titles.

Hachette, HarperCollins, and Simon & Schuster’s settlement to the suit seems like an initial victory for consumers and Amazon.  The settlement required the publishers to agree that “to stop “placing constraints” on retailers’ ability to offer discounts to consumers for two years; to stop sharing “competitively sensitive information” with competitors for five years; and to implement an “antitrust compliance program.”  This signals a temporary return to the $9.99 discounted pricing model.  Publishers argue the agency model is crucial to protecting the publishing industry by preserving competition.  The results of the lawsuits, however, could present even greater ramifications.  Apple, Amazon, and the publishers will eventually have to play nice and find a model that works.  Most importantly, however, they must insure that consumers are not victims of pricing controversy and reading remains an affordable hobby.

Written by: Malhar Naik

 

Malhar Naik is a 2L at Fordham Law. Born and raised in New Jersey, Malhar graduated from Boston College in 2008. He enjoys competitive sports, running, and movies.

Leave Your Response

The IPLJ Blog. Brought to you by:

Fordham University School of Law's Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal

Search by Tag

Archives

  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • August 2007
  • April 2007

Fordham University Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal BLOG

IPLJ Editor-In-Chief:
Ryan Fox

IPLJ Managing Editor:
Tiffany Miao

IPLJ Technology & Blog Editor:
Patricia Chang

Blogroll

SDNY Rules Digital Music NOT Subject to First Sale Doctrine

Apr. 25, 2013 // 0 Comments

Judge Richard J. Sullivan granted plaintiff Capitol...

shakiradelarua

Legal Woes for Colombian Popstar Shakira Ignite

Apr. 24, 2013 // 0 Comments

Internationally known singer Shakira is facing a...

twitterbird

Hashtag Tweet About It: Twitter Finally Gets a #Patent

Apr. 20, 2013 // 0 Comments

After years of patent pending actions for...

com

The Future of “.com”

Apr. 17, 2013 // 0 Comments

Following ICANN’s 46th meeting in Beijing, the President...

EuroPatent

The European Court of Justice Dismisses Actions Against the Single European Patent

Apr. 16, 2013 // 0 Comments

In 2011, the European Council authorized enhanced...

twitter2

Hiding Behind a Hashtag: #hatespeech or #freespeech

Apr. 13, 2013 // 0 Comments

Twitter is being sued in a French...

SME_innovation

Innovation in China

Apr. 12, 2013 // 0 Comments

In this South China Morning Post article, Benjamin...

Facebook-Lawsuit

Timeline Trademark Tiff

Apr. 10, 2013 // 0 Comments

Facebook Inc. is embroiled in a legal...

hang

Apple and You: New Patent to Track Almost Everything

Apr. 04, 2013 // 0 Comments

Apple recently filed a patent for a...

facebook-login-please-re-enter-your-password

Should Your Estate Receive Access to Your Facebook Account?

Mar. 26, 2013 // 0 Comments

New Hampshire and other states are trying...

Journal Updates

yoga

Article by IPLJ’s Senior Articles Editor Published!

Apr. 23, 2013 // 0 Comments

“Stretching Copyright to its Limit,” an article...

2013-Cultural-Heritage-Law-Panel-email

Art Law Panel Discussion: April 10, 2013, 7:30PM

Apr. 04, 2013 // 0 Comments

Please join us on April 10, 2013...

jackford

“Trials of The Century: Media and the Law” with Jack Ford: March 18, 2013, 4PM

Mar. 05, 2013 // 0 Comments

We here at IPLJ invite you to...

volume

Go, Little Book!

Jan. 10, 2013 // 0 Comments

Well, maybe not so little.  We’re thrilled...

law360

IPLJ Symposium Mentioned on Law360.com!

Nov. 15, 2012 // 0 Comments

Our sincere thanks to all of those...

cite

Big week for IPLJ’s Symposium Editor!

Nov. 08, 2012 // 0 Comments

A Volume XXII note written by IPLJ’s...

IP

November 9, 2012: IPLJ Symposium

Oct. 10, 2012 // 1 Comments

Please join us on Friday, November 9,...

hollywood

Fordham Law Named One of America’s Top 10 Entertainment Law Schools!

Jul. 20, 2012 // 0 Comments

We here at IPLJ are so proud...

4

Hello, Book 4!

Jul. 02, 2012 // 0 Comments

We are so pleased to share Book...

3

Book 3 Is Complete!

Apr. 27, 2012 // 0 Comments

We here at IPLJ are so happy...

Categories

  • Apple
  • Art
  • Blogroll
  • Books
  • Broadway
  • Celebrity
  • Cell Phones
  • Censorship
  • Communications Law
  • Computers
  • Congress
  • Copyright
  • Counterfeit
  • Design
  • DMCA
  • Doh!
  • Entertainment
  • Facebook
  • Fashion
  • First Amendment
  • Fourth Amendment
  • FSLF
  • General
  • Google
  • International IP Law
  • Internet
  • Journal Updates
  • Major League Baseball
  • Microsoft
  • Movies
  • Music
  • National Football League
  • NBA
  • NCAA
  • New York
  • News
  • Patents
  • Piracy
  • Plagiarism
  • Privacy
  • Royalties
  • Social Media
  • Sports
  • Startup
  • Surveillance
  • Technology
  • Television
  • Trade Secret
  • Trademark
  • Trolls
  • Twitter
  • United States Supreme Court
  • Video Games

Recent Posts

  • Google Death: New Feature Allows Users to Take Control of Their Digital Afterlife
  • SDNY Rules Digital Music NOT Subject to First Sale Doctrine
  • Legal Woes for Colombian Popstar Shakira Ignite
  • Will the U.S. Supreme Court Allow a Patent for a Human Gene?
  • Article by IPLJ’s Senior Articles Editor Published!

Admin

  • Log in
  • Entries RSS
  • Comments RSS
  • WordPress.org

The IPLJ

The Fordham Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal is one of the leading scholarly law journals dedicated to the publication of Articles, Essays, Comments, Addresses, and Notes on intellectual property, media, and entertainment law.

The Blog is the Journal's online counterpart. This Blog strives to present the most up-to-date intellectual property, media, sports, art, and entertainment law news and issues... and then some. We at the IPLJ find this ever-changing field fascinating and relevant. We hope you find this Blog to be the same.

  • © Copyright IPLJ / All Rights Reserved.
  • Premium WordPress Themes / Theme by wpStyles.org