U.S. judge says she is troubled by Apple $450 million e-books deal

NEW YORK Thu Jul 24, 2014 9:58pm EDT

The Apple logo is pictured inside the newly opened Omotesando Apple store at a shopping district in Tokyo June 26, 2014. REUTERS/Yuya Shino/Files

The Apple logo is pictured inside the newly opened Omotesando Apple store at a shopping district in Tokyo June 26, 2014.

Credit: Reuters/Yuya Shino/Files

Related Topics

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A U.S. judge on Thursday expressed concern over a proposed $450 million settlement of claims Apple Inc (AAPL.O) conspired with five publishers to fix e-book prices, saying its provisions could drastically reduce money paid to consumers depending on appeals.

U.S. District Judge Denise Cote in Manhattan said she found "most troubling" a clause requiring Apple to pay only $70 million if an appeals court reversed her finding that the company is liable for antitrust violations and sent it back to her for further proceedings.

Speaking on a teleconference, Cote questioned if that would be fair and what might happen if the appeals court reversed her ruling on a minor issue. She also took issue with the lack of any requirement for Apple to pay interest while the appeals go forward.

"I'm concerned about the terms of the settlement," she said.

The comments came a week after 33 U.S. states and territories and lawyers for a class of consumers submitted the settlement for Cote's preliminary approval, and to avoid a scheduled Aug. 25 damages trial.

Cote scheduled the trial after ruling last July that Apple was liable for colluding with publishers to impede e-book competitors such as Amazon.com Inc (AMZN.O).

The publishers include Lagardere SCA's (LAGA.PA) Hachette Book Group Inc, News Corp's (NWSA.O) HarperCollins Publishers LLC, Penguin Group (USA) Inc, CBS Corp's (CBS.N) Simon & Schuster Inc and Verlagsgruppe Georg von Holtzbrinck GmbH's Macmillan.

Cote's ruling came in an April 2012 lawsuit by the U.S. Department of Justice and the state attorneys general.

These plaintiffs were expected to seek up to $840 million in damages but reached settlements in which the publishers would provide $166 million to e-book purchasers, reducing Apple's exposure to $674 million.

The size of the Apple settlement depends on the outcome of the company's appeal of Cote's liability finding to the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

If Apple loses its appeal, it would pay $400 million to consumers and $50 million to the states and plaintiffs' lawyers.

In contrast, if Apple's appeal is successful but the 2nd Circuit returns the case to Cote for further proceedings or a new trial, the company would pay just $70 million, with $50 million for consumers. If the 2nd Circuit reversed Cote outright and ended the case, Apple would pay nothing.

On Thursday's call, Cote expressed concern that the middle scenario might be unfair to consumers by undervaluing their claims.

Steve Berman, a lawyer for the consumers, told her that such an outcome would result in a "much bleaker universe" for his clients.

"We thought given that unlikely scenario and the legal risk we would face it would be a good outcome for consumers," he said.

After the call ended, Berman said the parties would consider Cote's concerns. Apple did not respond to a request for comment.

The case is In Re: Electronic Books Antitrust Litigation, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, No. 11-md-02293.

FILED UNDER:
We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (1)
mdsjnj wrote:
$450M probably nets her $4.5M in bribe
$75M probably gets her $750K
Of course she is upset.

Jul 25, 2014 10:11am EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.