Advertisement

We need your help now

Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.

You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.

If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.

AP Photo/Marcio Jose Sanchez
Fixing

Apple loses bid to block antitrust monitor from ebooks case

The company tried to block the monitor saying he had a personal bias against it.

APPLE HAS LOST its bid to block an antitrust monitor appointed by the US Justice Department appointed to ensure it doesn’t fix ebook prices.

Reuters reports that the US district judge Denise Cote denied the company’s request to block Michael Bromwich, the person tasked with keeping the company within the bounds of antitrust laws.

Apple contested the decision saying that Bromwich, who was appointed in October, had a personal bias against the company. He then filed a declaration disputing Apple’s claims and referenced a number of unsuccessful attempts to gain the company’s cooperation.

Cote rejected the company’s claims saying there was “nothing improper” about a declaration filed by a lawyer to sever as monitor. She hoped Apple would cooperate with the monitor going forward, and urged both parties to bring disputes to her sooner.

Apple can still appeal the decision, but will only have 48 hours to do so after Cote elaborates on her decision.

Bromwich’s appointment was one of a number of conditions placed on Apple by the US Justice Department. It also ordered the company to sever its existing agreements with the major book publishers, and change the way competitors are able to display and link content within apps on its iOS platform.

Read: Apple’s App Store sales hits $10 billion in 2013 >

Read: Australian watchdog forces Apple to extend warranties >

Your Voice
Readers Comments
10
    Submit a report
    Please help us understand how this comment violates our community guidelines.
    Thank you for the feedback
    Your feedback has been sent to our team for review.