Apple filed an appeal on Friday to temporarily suspend the ruling about its violation of antitrust laws by conspiring with five major publishers to increase e-book prices in 2010. However, it was rejected by U.S. District Judge Denise Cote, quoting in an interview with the New Jersey, “it appeared collusion was continuing even after her findings.”
Cote refused to postpone the implementation of her last month’s verdict while the iPad maker continues to plea with what they call “false accusations.”
She accounted in the said interview that she “wasn't ready to rule on the government's suggested remedies to eliminate antitrust behavior.” Some government proposals, “reflecting a seriously continuing danger of collusion” were seemingly opposed by Apple and the publishers and that made the judge disappointed.
Last month, Cole ruled that in order to spoil the $9.99 electronic book price Amazon.com started, Apple had conspired with publishers. And that said ruling was supported by the federal regulators which commented that to go against Amazon and involving five major publishers had caused disadvantages to the consumers.
With its unwavering protection to the world's most valuable technology company, Apple has steadily refuted any of its wrongdoings, even as to avoid facing trials, the book publishers concerned, settled with the case.
After Apple signed with publishers’ “agency agreements,” which entitles publishers and not retailers set prices for each title, it was exposed in the trial that electronic book prices marked-up.
In an interview with the New Jersey, the publishers concerned with the e-book costing case refused the punishment the federal government wants to enforce on Apple, saying they will “hurt publishers rather than the personal electronics company.”
The five major publishers said in the court papers tendered on Wednesday, “The government's plans to ban Apple from engaging in agency agreements for five years wouldn't restrict Apple's pricing behavior. “
“Rather, under the guise of punishing Apple, they effectively punish the settling defendants by prohibiting agreements with Apple using an agency model,” said the lawyers of the publishers.
