蘋果串通出版商提高電子書價(jià)格罪名成立
|
????經(jīng)過三個(gè)星期的法官審理后，美國聯(lián)邦地方法院法官丹尼斯?科特在長達(dá)160頁的裁決書中寫道，蘋果（Apple）確實(shí)違反了謝爾曼反托拉斯法，與五家出版商合謀提高電子書的價(jià)格。 ????裁決書中的關(guān)鍵段落如下： ????“原告方顯示，被告方數(shù)家出版商串通一氣，消除零售價(jià)格競(jìng)爭，以提高電子書價(jià)格，而蘋果公司則在促進(jìn)和執(zhí)行共謀中扮演了關(guān)鍵角色。假如沒有蘋果的組織，這個(gè)陰謀就不會(huì)在2010年春季獲得成功。” ????盡管法官在宣判前就已宣布，她相信美國司法部（the Department of Justice）將證明其控訴，但她的裁決還是令聽了蘋果公司辯護(hù)的觀察人士吃驚不小。 ????存在爭議的主要不是相關(guān)事實(shí)，而是用于約束蘋果公司這樣的分銷商所采用的規(guī)則。對(duì)于分銷商或是競(jìng)爭對(duì)手（譬如圖書出版商）間達(dá)成橫向協(xié)議以操縱價(jià)格，近來的反壟斷判例法通常會(huì)區(qū)別對(duì)待。 ????雖然法院將另外安排一場(chǎng)單獨(dú)的審判，以確定賠償額，但此案似乎將必然被上訴，或許官司會(huì)一直打到美國最高法院。 ????最新消息：美國司法部和蘋果公司兩方都對(duì)此發(fā)表了聲明。 ????美國司法部：“企業(yè)不能為了自身經(jīng)濟(jì)利益而忽視反壟斷法。地方法院的此次判決是彌補(bǔ)蘋果公司違法行為所造成損害的關(guān)鍵一步。” ????蘋果公司的聲明：“蘋果并未與出版商合謀操縱電子書定價(jià)，我們將繼續(xù)與這些虛假指控作斗爭。我們于2010年推出iBookstore是給了客戶更多的選擇，給市場(chǎng)帶來了它非常需要的創(chuàng)新和競(jìng)爭，打破了亞馬遜（Amazon）對(duì)出版業(yè)的壟斷。我們不存在任何過錯(cuò)，我們將對(duì)法官的裁決提起上訴。”(財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)) ????譯者：項(xiàng)航 |
????In a 160-page ruling following a three-week bench trial, U.S. District Judge Denise Cote has found that Apple (AAPL) did indeed violate the Sherman antitrust act by conspiring with five publishers to raise the price of e-books. ????The key paragraph: ????"The Plaintiffs have shown that the Publisher Defendants conspired with each other to eliminate retail price competition in order to raise e-book prices, and that Apple played a central role in facilitating and executing that conspiracy. Without Apple's orchestration of this conspiracy, it would not have succeeded as it did in the Spring of 2010." ????Although the judge had announced before the trial began that she believed the Department of Justice would prove its case, the ruling comes as a surprise to observers who heard Apple's defense. ????The facts were less in dispute than the rules governing a distributor like Apple, which recent antitrust case law treats differently than competitors -- such as book publishers -- forming a horizontal agreement to fix prices. ????Although the judge is going to schedule a separate trial to determine damages, the case seems destined to be appealed, perhaps all the way to the Supreme Court. ????UPDATE: We have statements from both sides. ????The DOJ: "Companies cannot ignore the antitrust laws when they believe it is in their economic self-interest to do so. This decision by the court is a critical step in undoing the harm caused by Apple's illegal actions." ????Apple: "Apple did not conspire to fix ebook pricing and we will continue to fight against these false accusations. When we introduced the iBookstore in 2010, we gave customers more choice, injecting much needed innovation and competition into the market, breaking Amazon's monopolistic grip on the publishing industry. We've done nothing wrong and we will appeal the judge's decision." |
最新文章