More Apple for the day

Brian Chen has an article in The New York Times about bad behavior by Apple:

A Federal appeals court has upheld a ruling that determined Apple to be the leader of an industrywide conspiracy among book publishers to raise prices of digital books.
By a 2-to-1 vote, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit said it agreed with the conclusions of Judge Denise L. Cote of the United States District Court in Manhattan, who rendered the decision in 2013.
“We conclude that the district court’s decision that Apple orchestrated a horizontal conspiracy among the publisher defendants to raise e-book prices is amply supported and well reasoned, and that the agreement unreasonably restrained trade,” the appeals court wrote in its decision.
In the case, brought in 2012, the Justice Department accused Apple and five book publishers of conspiring to raise e-book prices above Amazon’s standard price of $9.99 for new e-book titles. The idea, the government said, was to allow publishers to set their own prices rather than letting retailers do so. The five book publishers settled the case before the trial.
When Apple entered the e-book market, it changed the way publishers sold books by introducing a model called agency pricing, in which the publisher, not the retailer, set the price, and Apple took a cut of each sale. The Justice Department argued that left Amazon.com, the other big e-books retailer, no choice other than to raise prices.
Apple fought the accusation in 2013 and lost after a monthlong trial. The words of Steven P. Jobs, the company’s co-founder, who died in 2011, proved damaging.
An email written by Jobs that referred to the agency model was frequently brought up at the trial. In the email, sent to Eddy Cue, Apple’s senior vice president for internet software and services, Mr. Jobs wrote of the contracts negotiated with publishers: “I can live with this, as long as they move Amazon to the agent model too for new releases for the first year. If they don’t, I’m not sure we can be competitive.”
In her ruling, Judge Cote said emails and spoken statements by Mr. Jobs made clear he knew that publishers were unhappy with Amazon’s price of $9.99 for e-books and that Apple’s entry would drive up prices across the industry.
“Apple has struggled mightily to reinterpret Jobs’s statements in a way that will eliminate their bite,” Judge Cote wrote. “Its efforts have proven fruitless.”
The Justice Department said it was gratified by the court’s decision.
“The decision confirms that it is unlawful for a company to knowingly participate in a price-fixing conspiracy, whatever its specific role in the conspiracy or reason for joining it,” William J. Baer, assistant attorney general of the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division, said in a statement.
Timothy D. Cook, the company’s current chief executive, called the e-book case “bizarre,” and the company fought to overturn the judge’s ruling. The company on Tuesday reiterated its disappointment in the decision in a statement.
“Apple did not conspire to fix e-book pricing and this ruling does nothing to change the facts,” said Josh Rosenstock, an Apple spokesman. “We are disappointed the court does not recognize the innovation and choice the iBooks Store brought for consumers. While we want to put this behind us, the case is about principles and values. We know we did nothing wrong back in 2010, and are assessing our next steps.”

Rico says WHAT