It what might be the last action in the long-running copyright case against GSU, the publishers have been ordered to cover the university's legal costs, amounting to over four million dollars. Publishers Weekly has the story.
In all, the price-fixing suit will have refunded $566 million to e-book consumers, including $400 million from Apple and $166 million paid in 2014 from the five publishers accused of collusion (Hachette, HarperCollins, Macmillan, Penguin, and Simon & Schuster).
They're not done. Now, even though the Supreme Court has not yet agreed to hear the case, a basketful of amicus briefs have been filed. Publishers Weekly has the news.
With slight variations, all of the briefs essentially argue Apple's point: that the court incorrectly found Apple liable for a “per se” case of price fixing, rather than applying the more stringent “rule of reason” which, supporters claim would have exonerated Apple.
In an amicus brief, the Authos Guild, the ABA, B&N, and others back Apple's attempt to roll back the antitrust decision against it. Publishers Weekly has the story.
The amicus brief comes in support of Apple’s petition this fall to have the Supreme Court review the case, after the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in June upheld Judge Denise Cote’s 2013 ruling finding the company liable for price-fixing. Apple attorneys argue that the lower courts erred in finding Apple liable for a “per se” case of price-fixing, rather than applying the more rigorous “rule of reason” standard...
If the Supreme Court rejects Apple’s appeal, Apple’s liability finding would be considered final under a 2014 settlement with 33 states and a consumer class, triggering $400 million in consumer rebates.
By granting the Devault-Graves Agengcy’s request to transfer the case rather than dismiss it outright on the jurisdictional issue, the judge essentially saved the publisher the pain and expense of starting their case again from scratch in another court. Still, the case likely faces an uphill battle in New Hampshire.
“For nearly 300 years, since shortly after the birth of copyright in England in 1710, courts have recognized that, in certain circumstances, giving authors absolute control over all copying from their works would tend in some circumstances to limit, rather than expand, public knowledge,” writes the judge in his decision.
The largest online retailer said it sued freelancers offering to write fictional reviews on Fiverr.com, an online marketplace where people can be hired for minor tasks at prices starting at $5. The lawsuit was filed in state court in Seattle, Amazon said.