PublishersLunch
The results of those new agreements--including new, often higher list prices on Harper ebooks, as well as discounts on at least some of those ebooks--are reflected in many major ebookstores. Be warned, however, that many accounts you will read are either incomplete or simply wrong.
As Harper says in the statement above, they have reached new agreements broadly with their ebook accounts. This is not a story just about Amazon, and to paint it that way is a serious misrepresentation. The confusing part is that the implementation appears to vary among ebook accounts. There are at least two possible reasons for this. As we observed previously, implementation of new pricing schemes may vary as publishers change terms for lists of thousands of titles. One retailer confirmed on background that they were displaying and working under Harper's new pricing, but are discounting manually and selectively until their system is up to speed. Another retailer said on background that they were in discussions with the settling publishers and did not have any new agreements in place, yet that site also started displaying updated HarperCollins ebook prices--so it's possible that etailers are doing what the competitive landscape requires as they finalize and execute their new Harper agreements.
With no response yet from District Court
Judge Denise Cote to his Friday motions seeking permission to both stay and
appeal the ebook settlement, entrepreneur and attorney Bob Kohn filed an
emergency request with the Second Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday morning.
He asked the Appeals Court "to consider and rule upon" his motion for
a stay by this Friday. Reasserting many of the arguments made last week to
Judge Cote, Kohn posits that "without a stay of execution of the final
judgment, an appeal becomes moot and the consequent harm to the public becomes
irreparable."
To meet the court's conditions, Kohn argues
his appeal "has a sufficient possibility of success" given the case
law he has cited; that "absent a stay, e-book consumers and the public
generally will suffer irreparable harm"; and that a stay "would not
harm" either the plaintiffs or the defendants.
No comments:
Post a Comment