When take antitrust failed

This article is part of the On Tech newsletter. You can do this Register here Getting it on weekdays.

If you have recently wondered why the prices of e-books seem to be high, let me tell you why the failure (partly) of faulty law can be blamed.

The aim of a government retaliatory lawsuit a decade ago was to help take prices to a higher level rather than push them down.

The result suggests that against the US government lawsuits Google And Facebook And Connecticut announced Antitrust investigation into Amazon’s e-book business If governments win, there may not be the desired effect. It is learned that the alleged illegal may try to change corporate behavior.

Cast your mind to 2012. The second “Twilight” film was the big one. And Justice Department Apple and America sued five major book publishers In the name of protecting consumers and our wallets.

Was the publisher of the book get excited Regarding Amazon’s habit of pricing many popular Kindle books for $ 9.99 no matter what the book companies thought the price should be. Amazon was willing to lose money on e-books, but publishers worried that it would devalue their products.

The government said that to strike back at Amazon, book companies and Apple struck a deal. Publishers can set their e-book prices on Apple’s digital bookstore, and they can essentially withhold discounts by any bookseller, including Amazon.

To the government it seemed like a plot to eliminate competition over prices – under a large number of antitrust laws. Eventually the book publishers settled down and Apple lost in court.

Later, Amazon, Apple and other e-book sellers agreed to allow publishers to implement e-book prices. The arrangement was legally kosher because they had separate conversations between each publisher and bookseller. (I cannot answer why Amazon agreed to this.

The government won but the publishers got what they wanted with the e-books. Bookstores may choose to take a loss for heavily discounting a print book, but they usually cannot with digital editions. The $ 10 mass-market e-book is mostly gone.

How was an antitrust case meant for possibly higher prices rather than lowering prices? Christopher L, A law professor at Cleveland State University who wrote A book about e-book lawsuits, Told me that they believe it is a failure of anti-corporate laws.

Professor villagers and others believe that because some major book publishers mostly release large market titles, they hold the power to keep prices high. He stresses that anti-industry laws have failed to stop being so concentrated. In other words, they think it’s bad for all of us that a book-publishing monopoly is trying to fight Amazon’s monopoly.

“The American antitrust is basically a failure and the case was a microcosm,” he told me.

Somehow this newspaper comes back to this debate. One influential approach – especially among left-leaning economists, politicians and scholars – is that American antitrust laws or the way they apply Are defective. They believe that the government has failed to stop it Increase corporate concentration And mergers in industries such as airlines, banking and banking Technology, Causing higher prices, worse products and Income inequality.

For the book industry and for us in the long run, it may be healthy to run an artificially low $ 10 mass-market digital novel. And there are many low-cost Kindle works, however, Self-published author and Amazon’s own book-publishing unit.

Amazon was selling an e-book version of Professor Sensors’ book about a $ 28.45 pricing lawsuit on Friday – a price set by the book publisher. “I wish it was cheaper,” he said. “I wanted a lot of people to read it.”

If you do not already receive this newsletter in your inbox, Please sign up here.


Maybe you bought The rug Recently from Amazon. or Those tikkok leggings That women are showing off. I myself Amazon coatPretty inexpensive outerwear star before a couple of winters.

It is not uncommon for these products from relatively unknown brands to become increasingly popular. On social media, word of mouth, smart advertising or recommendations from influential people can make any product go viral.

And when it does, it makes me wonder if the brands that matter the most in the stuff we’re buying are Instagram, Amazon, and Tiktok – not the companies that actually make the product.

I don’t think anyone referred to it as the “Orola coat”, although it was the company that made the Amazon coat. (I had to check my closet to make sure I got the brand name right.) Those who bought The Rug might not know it from a company called Rugs USA. It’s just cool that they saw it on Instagram and bought it on Amazon.

And if I pinch women who make TikTok videos Regarding your favorite new leggings, can they tell you which company made them? Possibly more than one company making similar leggings with a honeycomb pattern? I don’t know, guys, this is not a fashion newspaper.

My point is that social media sites where we get to know about products and the websites where we buy them are far more influential than the name of the product creator.

Sure, some brands still matter. You can be devoted to Nike shoes, no matter what. But I bet others may have discovered Nike shoes on Amazon, Can’t find what they’re looking for And buy a different sneaker brand.

Amazon already has information about your purchase, you trust the company and it can ship shoes faster. Amazon may not have made the sneakers, but it is the brand that matters the most.


  • Weld, he was in vain: Remember all the fighting whether the Trump administration would block Tikok in the United States? Yes, He went nowhere And now Joe Biden has to figure out what to do about TickTock and other technology from Chinese companies, writes my colleague David McCabe.

  • Facebook’s double standards: The threat of violence from provocative posts and misinformation on social media is nothing new in many parts of the world. Adam Satriano says that after Facebook and Twitter suspended President Trump, Activists are asking why companies have not taken action elsewhere.

  • People buying unseen houses from TikTok? Buzzfeed digs in the news House fluttering on Tiktok. And people making fun of houses and absurd kitchen remodels in the Tickcock video.

a The Raven named Merlin went missing and now Britain is worried that the nation will end. Honestly, Brits, explain yourself.


we want to hear from you. Tell us what you think about this newspaper and what you want us to find out. You can reach us ontech@nytimes.com

If you do not already receive this newsletter in your inbox, Please sign up here.

Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *