April 2012

The Department of Justice announced that it has reached a settlement with three of the largest book publishers in the United States -- Hachette Book Group (USA), HarperCollins Publishers L.L.C. and Simon & Schuster -- and will continue to litigate against Apple and two other publishers -- Holtzbrinck Publishers LLC, which does business as Macmillan, and Penguin Group (USA) -- for conspiring to end e-book retailers’ freedom to compete on price, take control of pricing from e-book retailers and substantially increase the prices that consumers pay for e-books.

The department said that the publishers prevented retail price competition resulting in consumers paying millions of dollars more for their e-books. The civil antitrust lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against Apple, Hachette, HarperCollins, Macmillan, Penguin and Simon & Schuster. At the same time, the department filed a proposed settlement that, if approved by the court, would resolve the department’s antitrust concerns with Hachette, HarperCollins and Simon & Schuster, and would require the companies to grant retailers -- such as Amazon and Barnes & Noble -- the freedom to reduce the prices of their e-book titles. The department’s Antitrust Division and the European Commission cooperated closely with each other throughout the course of their respective investigations, with frequent contact between the investigative staffs and the senior officials of the two agencies. The department also worked closely with the states of Connecticut and Texas to uncover the publishers’ illegal conspiracy.

According to the complaint, the five publishers and Apple were unhappy that competition among e-book sellers had reduced e-book prices and the retail profit margins of the book sellers to levels they thought were too low. To address these concerns, they worked together to enter into contracts that eliminated price competition among bookstores selling e-books, substantially increasing prices paid by consumers. Before the companies began their conspiracy, retailers regularly sold e-book versions of new releases and bestsellers for, as described by one of the publisher’s CEO, the “wretched $9.99 price point.” As a result of the conspiracy, consumers are now typically forced to pay $12.99, $14.99, or more for the most sought-after e-books, the department said.

About a fifth of federal employees telework, but about another fifth are “part-time mobile workers,” plugging into the office through laptops, smartphones and other remote access devices as needed, according to a survey of agency information technology professionals.

The poll of 152 IT workers was conducted in February by the Telework Exchange, a consortium that promotes telework whose sponsors include businesses that sell devices and services for use in working remotely. The respondents estimated that 21 percent of federal employees are teleworkers, a figure in line with results of government-wide employee surveys taken in 2010 and 2011. But in those surveys, most of those who identified themselves as teleworkers said they work at home or at other sites away from the office no more than one or two days per month. The most recent count by the Office of Personnel Management, released in early 2011 and covering 2009, showed that only about 6 percent of federal workers telecommute. That report attributed the differences in figures to the varying approaches, with the employee survey reflecting different individual views on what constitutes telework. The new survey of IT professionals said that apart from teleworkers, 22 percent of federal employees are part-time mobile workers, connecting remotely at least once every two weeks while they are away for travel, off-site meetings or other reasons.

Big Brother might get blinders, at least in California. A state senator recently introduced a bill to prohibit government entities from obtaining location information from cellphones without a warrant.

State Sen. Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) proposed SB 1434, an amendment to the Penal Code, to clarify the use of this ubiquitous and near-constant data stream in our pockets. “Unfortunately, California’s privacy laws have not kept up with the electronic age, and government agencies are frequently accessing this sensitive information without adequate oversight,” he said in a prepared statement. This follows an audit by the American Civil Liberties Union of the policies and practices of law enforcement agencies around the country. The organization found that, for the majority of those that participated, it's not uncommon for cellphones to be virtually tailed using either the phone's own GPS or cellular triangulation without obtaining a warrant or subpoena.

News Corp.’s Fox Sports objected to the Los Angeles Dodgers’ bankruptcy reorganization plan, which hinges on a $2 billion sale of the baseball team, over the broadcaster’s rights to renegotiate a contract to televise games.

“The plan does not contain sufficient information” to allow Fox to ascertain whether its telecast rights are being impaired, it said in court papers filed yesterday in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Wilmington, Delaware. Fox seeks a written affirmation that Time Warner Cable or an affiliate isn’t part of the group buying the equity interest of the Dodgers. The broadcaster wants the omitted portions of the plan and sale agreement disclosed to determine if its telecast rights have been violated. Fox also wants confirmation that the buyers don’t have formal or informal agreements with Time Warner Cable or any other media outlet that could harm its rights. Fox argues that although the Dodgers have filed papers stating “that Time Warner Cable is not purchasing” the team, the possibility remains, and needs to be disclosed, that it may be an investor in the purchasing group “or is otherwise indirectly funding the purchase.” US Bankruptcy Judge Kevin Gross in Wilmington is scheduled to consider approval of the plan at a hearing April 13. The sale must be completed by April 30.