US Supreme Court Extends DoJ Deadline in Apple Antitrust Case

1991.89.14_1a

Apple's inevitable victory over the inimicable US Department of Justice has been put on hold.

An update to the US Supreme Court website reveals that the USSC has extended the filing deadline for all parties to 4 January 2016.

Apple has already filed its appeal of the July 2013 ruling which found that the gadget maker had conspired with five publishers to raise and fix ebook prices, so this extension will mainly affect the DoJ by giving it more time to file its brief.

In related news, the court docket also mentions that the USSC has consented to "the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party". In other words, now the publishers, as well as everyone else, have a chance to voice their legal opinions.

I'm rather hoping someone takes them up on it, and uses the opportunity to counter Apple's argument that Judge Denise Cote erred in ruling Apple's actions illegalper se under the Sherman antitrust act, rather than analyzing the conspiracy under the rule of reason.

PW

image via the Smithsonian

About Nate Hoffelder (11581 Articles)
Nate Hoffelder is the founder and editor of The Digital Reader:"I've been into reading ebooks since forever, but I only got my first ereader in July 2007. Everything quickly spiraled out of control from there. Before I started this blog in January 2010 I covered ebooks, ebook readers, and digital publishing for about 2 years as a part of MobileRead Forums. It's a great community, and being a member is a joy. But I thought I could make something out of how I covered the news for MobileRead, so I started this blog."

4 Comments on US Supreme Court Extends DoJ Deadline in Apple Antitrust Case

  1. I remember yelling collusion when Jobs seemed to know the terms of a contract Amazon hadn’t settled on yet. Not sure why Apple didn’t just settle. Macmillan was the ring leader and even they settled.

  2. Apple didn’t settle because they were completely in the right, as Judge Dennis Jacobs said in his circuit court dissent where he predicted the Supreme Court would need to overturn the decision. If Apple had settled, it would have been a terrible legal precedent, allowing the DOJ to dictate in advance how any tech company was allowed to enter new markets.

    http://eveshungry.blogspot.com/2015/07/dissent-in-apple-ebook-case-points-to.html

    Not long ago, Apple haters all said the Supreme Court would never hear the case. Guess what, they did. Apple is going to win this.

  3. “Not long ago, Apple haters all said the Supreme Court would never hear the case. Guess what, they did.”

    Did they? The deadline extension was for responses to Apple’s request for a writ of certiorari. If the SCOTUS doesn’t grant cert, they won’t review the case. Read Nate’s link to SCOTUS “Update.”

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


*