Comments on: What the DOJ e-book lawsuit means for readers now

By: Wayne Abbott

Wayne Abbott — Wed, 06 Jun 2012 20:52:23 +0000

The authors? The ruling doesn’t change anything that I can see. Authors can enter into agreements with publishers, they can self-publish; they are free now as they were before to make the best deal for themselves.

By: asongbird

asongbird — Sun, 22 Apr 2012 01:46:28 +0000

Uh.. me too!

By: Steve

Steve — Tue, 17 Apr 2012 11:26:43 +0000

Everyone’s been talk about what this ruling might mean for the the publishers, retailers, and buyers. I’d like to see discussion of what this ruling means for authors.

By: Dan Meadows

Dan Meadows — Tue, 17 Apr 2012 02:49:52 +0000

Aren’t there reporting requirements in the settlement that go beyond two years, though, giving DOJ access to internal documents and strategies for ebooks and pricing? I would imagine that would act as a chilling effect on reinstituting an identical deal when the prohibition is up.

By: Gil Baron

Gil Baron — Tue, 17 Apr 2012 02:17:22 +0000

I hope this means the obscene price J.K. Rowling wants for her coming book of $19.99 will not happen. This is only $2 less than hardcover.

By: Rich

Rich — Mon, 16 Apr 2012 23:10:54 +0000

It has taken these content creators a very, very long time to figure out that everybody – even them – is better off without DRM. WAY too slow to figure that out.

By: Laura Hazard Owen

Laura Hazard Owen — Mon, 16 Apr 2012 19:32:49 +0000

Hey Charles, you are correct that agency pricing has not been ruled illegal. The two-year period appears intended as a kind of “reset,” after which the settling publishers may enact it again. Also note “what doesn’t change” above.

By: Laura Hazard Owen

Laura Hazard Owen — Mon, 16 Apr 2012 19:29:38 +0000

Lucien, great point about the DRM — definitely something that has been a big topic of discussion since the suit was filed. I have added a paragraph on that in the piece.

By: Charles Hughes

Charles Hughes — Mon, 16 Apr 2012 19:00:24 +0000

This seems like a bad deal for consumers. If I read the terms of the settlement correctly, there will be a two year period of no price fixing by the publishers involved, followed by a free grant for the publishers to do exactly what they’re doing now, with the Department of Justice’s blessing.

By: Lucian Armasu

Lucian Armasu — Mon, 16 Apr 2012 17:38:33 +0000

So what I gather from this is:

1) These settlements and lawsuit will help bring innovation in the market, by allowing for all-you-can-eat plans, bundles, freebies, and significantly lower e-book prices.

2) Apple made some kind of deal with the big publishers to not allow small publishers in the iBooks store that weren’t using the agency model. Once this restriction is eliminated (again, thanks to the lawsuit), you should even an even richer catalog of e-books in the iBooks store as a reader.

So far so good. The lawsuit seems to have been really helpful for consumers. Now if only DoJ would somehow force publishers to abandon DRM as well, we’d see even more innovation in the e-book market, and readers would feel less locked-in within Amazon’s ecosystem. That would ultimately help the publishers as well, as Amazon wouldn’t be such a powerful gatekeeper anymore that forces its readers to only use the Kindle format.