Share:

Feds Accuse Apple of Personally Attacking Antitrust Monitor

Share:

Ibooks ios7

The US Department of Justice has responded to Apple’s formal letter filed with the court last week regarding the disqualification of the court-appointed lawyer who oversees the iPhone maker’s e-book pricing practices (via GigaOm).

“Regrettably, it is now clear that Apple has chosen a campaign of character assassination over a culture of compliance. Apple could have been spending the past months working with the External Compliance Monitor with the ultimate goal of reforming its policies and training and in the process change its corporate tone to one that reflects a commitment to abiding by the requirements of the antitrust laws. Instead, Apple has focused on personally attacking Mr. Bromwich, and thwarting him from performing even the most basic of his court-ordered functions,” the first paragraph of the US Department of Justice’s letter sent to the court reads.

The harsh-worded reply comes to reject Apple’s request to disqualify the lawyer appointed by Judge Denise Cote last fall, Mr. Bromwich, based on excessive fees and inaccurate reports.

Bromwich was appointed by Cote after the court found Apple guilty of conspiring with five publishers to fix the price of e-books.

In its reply, the DoJ says “Apple’s papers were littered with factual inaccuracies and gross exaggerations regarding its interactions with Mr. Bromwich.” But it doesn’t stop here: The DoJ also attempts to characterize Apple as a company that won’t acknowledge its wrongdoings. In the end, the DoJ says that if Apple would cease obstructing the court-appointed monitor from performing his responsibilities, it is confident that he would assist Apple in reaching the “goals the Court articulated when it decided a monitor was necessary.”

DOJ Response to Apple Request to Remove Bromwich by jeff_roberts881

Share:

  • Chrome262

    I don’t see why they wouldn’t just appoint a monitor that satisfies both parties. If Bromwich and cotes do have a “special” relationship, even a proven hint of it, they should go with someone else. Even if its baseless they should run with someone else, it will prove if Apple has legit concerns or if just them stalling. Bromwich just wants his cash I am sure, but its just best to eliminate variables one at a time and solve the issue. Not sure if Apple as requested someone else. But the WSJ thinks Cote has issues, so who knows they could be right. In any event shouldn’t DOJ just have their own agent do this not a lawyer?

  • m Arch Tom’s on Bar N Ass

    … and EU anti-trust monitor now, want to be informed. who the hell is “driving”/ managing apple inc in US these days? a russian cartel together with corrupted catholics from ireland and other latin or catholics countries even from within latin america? we want and demand answers , in order to inform our consumer market members and EU citizens about, who we are supporting when purchasing apple inc. products and services. we don’t want to support a communist-like business (getting state funds to accomplish a job for some government other than US one) likely to import products into EU and with embedded technologies to “spy” on and steal intellectual property of , our own EU citizen members.(a market, consumer market)
    take care,
    marc

Deals