YAAT: Apple Said to Face Inquiry About Online Music [MRG]

[BlackEleven]

YAAT: Yet Another Apple Thread

Apple to possibly face anti-trust inquiry regarding its online music sales, specifically for punishing retailers for participating in Amazon promotions.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/26/te...y/26apple.html

[FanIn80]

The "market" debate is still an ongoing one. If they only look at digital downloads, then Apple's 70% share is a clear monopoly. If they look at the entire US music industry, Apple's 28% (while more than double its nearest competitor), is not a clear monopoly.

So, the question remains... does having a 70% share of a distribution method that only accounts for 40% of the entire market count as a true monopoly? If not, then there is no Anti-trust issue to speak of, since there isn't a monopoly to abuse.

As for threatening record labels over their participation in Amazon's "sell your music at a loss" promotion, well... what really needs to be said about that? It's not the first time a large vendor has tried to strong-arm a supplier into giving them more product.

[Mike F]

According to a number of reports this week, summarized here, DOJ is starting to collect evidence on various Apple dealings, including the purported strong arming of Sony and EMI with respect to digital music.

From the NY Times article:

The Justice Department is examining Apple’s tactics in the market for digital music, and its staff members have talked to major music labels and Internet music companies, according to several people briefed on the conversations.

. . . . people briefed on the inquiries also said investigators had asked in particular about recent allegations that Apple used its dominant market position to persuade music labels to refuse to give the online retailer Amazon.com exclusive access to music about to be released.

From the NY Post article:

The Justice Dept.'s probe into Apple is expanding to include how the iPhone and iPad maker does business with media outfits in areas beyond music, The Post has learned.

According to several sources, the Justice Dept. has contacted a handful of the country's biggest media and technology companies to get their views on Apple, which, after years of casting itself as the tiny outsider, has become an 800-pound gorilla calling the shots in several arenas.

"The [Justice Dept.] is doing outreach," said one Hollywood industry source. "You can't dictate terms to the industry. The Adobe thing is just inviting the wrath of everybody."

. . . .

Further, as The Post reported this month, the Justice Dept. also is asking questions about the terms that Apple lays out for computer programmers who want to develop apps for the iPad.

[Hack&Lube]

This is a good thing both in terms of opening up fair competition in the marketplace and improving developer compensation and control of their software.

[FlamesPuck12]

Also posted here:
http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthread.php?t=91344

[psicodude]

Dear Apple:

It sucks at the top.

Signed,

Microsoft.

[Mike F]

Originally Posted by FlamesPuck12

Also posted here:
http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthread.php?t=91344

iFata

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by psicodude

Dear Apple:

It sucks at the top.

Signed,

Microsoft.

except for the part where you make billions of dollars

[psicodude]

Originally Posted by Hack&Lube

except for the part where you make billions of dollars

And the chicks...even if they are all lawyers.

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

As for threatening record labels over their participation in Amazon's "sell your music at a loss" promotion, well... what really needs to be said about that? It's not the first time a large vendor has tried to strong-arm a supplier into giving them more product.

That's not strong arming a supplier to give you more product. It's forcing a competitior out of your market by colluding with publishers.

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by psicodude

And the chicks...even if they are all lawyers.

Money for nothing and chicks for free. I want my, I want my MTV.