Why should I provide my email address?

Start saving money today with our FREE daily newsletter packed with the best FREE and bargain Kindle book deals. We will never share your email address!
Sign Up Now!

Amazon Pushes Back Positively on Labor Issues with Innovative New Education Initiative, Paying 95% of Tuition Costs for Employees

Jeff Bezos is no Joe Hill, and his company — along with Apple, Walmart and others — has come under increasingly frequent criticism from labor activists and progressives for being unfriendly to union organizing and, according to some, a tough place to work. Parsing such matters can be a delicate balance for progressives; as we wrote here in April:

While the company certainly has its detractors among competitors, some publishers, some authors, and progressives who decry the company’s labor practices, it is nonetheless an enormously popular company. So progressives like me might wring our hands over the conditions faced by Amazon’s warehouse workers, but at the end of the day Amazon has more progressive titles and more progressive customers than any other bookstore….

Other predictable consequences of Amazon’s dominance not only in the ebook sphere but beyond could create problems for the company if it does not make forward-looking changes in the way it does business. The company is seen by many as a tax-avoiding bogeyman that is destroying not only publishers and wholesalers but independent bookstores in particular and Main Street in general, and while there are major economic forces at work here that would probably lead to the same conclusion without Amazon at the head of march, Amazon has to realize that it should do everything possible to avoid being seen as the online version of Walmart. And while Amazon has escaped much of the kind of negative attention that has surrounded Apple and its FoxConn manufacturing plant in China, there is an emerging campaign among labor activists and progressive journalists to focus a spotlight on poor conditions in Amazon fulfillment centers. As with all of these concerns, there are real issues at play, and Amazon’s best moves would be substantive rather than media-driven.

Our point, of course, was that a company in Amazon’s position might well be too powerful for any among us to force it into what we might consider best labor practices, but Amazon — even if more out of a sense of realpolitik than noblesse oblige or progressive principles — would do best to play a positive, innovative leadership role both in addressing its tax responsibilities as a corporate citizen and in making every nook and cranny of its corporate empire (including any out-of-the-way spots where contract, 1099, or third-party employees might toil) “best in class” as places to work, to prosper, and to grow.

So we don’t want to congratulate a marathoner gratuitously for a strong first mile, but all in all, we see Amazon’s press release this afternoon as a promising step, and we will keep watching.

Amazon Launches Innovative New Education Initiative, Paying 95% of Tuition Costs for Employees to Pursue Their Aspirations – Whether at Amazon, or in Another Industry

SEATTLE–(BUSINESS WIRE)–Jul. 23, 2012– Amazon.com (NASDAQ: AMZN) today announced the Amazon Career Choice Program, an innovative new program designed to expand the choices available to its employees in their future careers, whether at Amazon or in another industry. Many fulfillment center employees will choose to build their careers at Amazon. For others, a job at Amazon might be a step towards a career in another field. Amazon wants to make it easier for employees to make that choice and pursue their aspirations.

Jeff Bezos – Photo Credit: James Duncan Davidson

“At Amazon, we like to pioneer, we like to invent, and we’re not willing to do things the normal way if we can figure out a better way,” said Jeff Bezos, founder and CEO of Amazon.com, in a letter posted on the front page of Amazon. “It can be difficult in this economy to have the flexibility and financial resources to teach yourself new skills. So, for people who’ve been with us as little as three years, we’re offering to pre-pay 95% of the cost of courses such as aircraft mechanics, computer-aided design, machine tool technologies, medical lab technologies, nursing, and many other fields.”

The program is unusual because unlike traditional tuition reimbursement programs, Amazon will exclusively fund education only in areas that are well-paying and in high demand according to sources like the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the company will fund those areas regardless of whether those skills are relevant to a career at Amazon.

“I welcome Amazon’s innovative initiative, which offers a new and exciting way for corporate support of employee education,” said Washington State Governor Chris Gregoire. “I hope that other companies follow Amazon’s lead and I thank them for a creative new approach.”

The Amazon Career Choice Program builds on a series of innovations at Amazon’s fulfillment centers. Amazon’s high productivity allows the company to pay its fulfillment center employees 30% more than traditional physical retail store employees while still offering customers the lowest prices. Amazon’s work on safety practices has been so effective that it’s statistically safer to work in an Amazon fulfillment center than in a traditional department store.

Amazon’s bias for reinvention extends into recruiting programs across its fulfillment network. Amazon’s seasonal recruiting program CamperForce – where RVers combine work with camping – has been very successful and hundreds of campers return every year. Amazon’s military veteran recruiting program effectively helps vets transition into the civilian workforce. Amazon was recently named the #1 Top Military Friendly Employer by G.I. Jobs Magazine.

To learn more about the Amazon Career Choice Program, please visit www.amazon.com/careerchoice.

Price and Feature Wars Ahead for Kindle eBooks and Tablets as Google Hits a Home Run with the New $199 Google Nexus 7 Tablet

My $199 Google Nexus 7 tablet arrived Wednesday, and I’m a newly minted fan. Kindle Nation Daily, and I personally, have been ardent in our love for all things Kindle for almost five years now, and this has not changed. But our heads have been turned by this new kid on the block. And not just because the emergence of the Google tablet could lead to some real ebook price and feature competition (as we’ll see later.)

The Google Nexus 7 hardware itself, and the attention to quality with which this 7-inch tablet has been built, is a flat-out triumph. The Nexus 7 hardware is manufactured for Google’s Android 4.1 (Jelly Bean) platform by Asus, and whether you give Google credit for bringing the Nexus 7 to market or for simply selecting the right Android tablet product from the available third-party choices, kudos are definitely in order.

Just to hit a few of the hardware high points, the unit comes with a 7” 1280×800 HD display (216 ppi) (same size as the Kindle display, better resolution than the Fire’s 169 ppi, not as good as the iPad’s 264), scratch-resistant Corning glass and a 1.2MP front-facing camera, and it weighs under 12 ounces (the Kindle Fire is 14.6 ounces and the iPad is about 23 ounces.) It has nice 10-hour battery life for most purposes (much longer if all you are doing is listening to music or an audiobook), ships with a fast, crisp Quad-core Tegra 3 processor, wifi, a camera, a microphone, and an accelerometer, among other things. The base unit comes with 1 GB RAM and 8 GB storage, or you can pay $249 for 16 GB storage.

There are various ways to look at this turn of events, and while they are largely good for Google, they are not necessarily bad for Amazon and the Kindle Fire. One reason the emergence of a Google tablet is actually great for Amazon is that, like the iPad, the iPhone, and several other devices, it is one more way to connect with the Kindle Store, the Amazon MP3 store and cloud player, the Amazon-owned Audible.com store, and the overall Amazon store, but of course there’s more to it than that.

There are now four important tablets on the market, and for the first time since late 2011, the game may be about to change at a fundamental level. Until now, the Kindle Fire has not had serious competition — in terms of the overall value proposition — from any other tablet. The Nook is a nice hardware unit that has been hampered on the content and customer-experience side by an Edsel-like initial presentation, atrocious customer service, and deceptive marketing. The Apple iPad is very cool, but at $399-$829 it is so expensive that it seems as if Apple thinks it is in a different market niche from that occupied by the Kindle Fire and the Nook (which is why the Fire has made serious inroads on the iPad market share.)

All that has changed, and the real competition is now on. As a hardware device, the Nexus 7 is significantly superior to either the Kindle Fire or the Nook, and one has to get into very arcane and rather nitpicky territory to find much about it that is inferior to the iPad.

In trying to define the value proposition among tablets in the past, I have stated my view that for most users the Kindle Fire can do 75 to 85% of what you actually would do with an iPad for 23 to 50% of the iPad’s cost. For the Nexus 7, based on my extensive use of it during the past 48 hours, I believe it can do about 97% of what most users actually would want to do with the iPad, still for just 23 to 50% of the iPad’s cost.

That’s pretty compelling. If you demand that your tablet must have “retina display,” you’ll want a third-generation iPad, and such magical and revolutionary enhancements combined with Apple’s brand power will likely dictate continued growth in iPad sales. But unless the iPad finds a way to compete with the Google tablet’s $199 price, that growth will slow, and it seems very likely that Apple’s iOs tablet market share, estimated recently at 70%, could decline to a minority share, as early as this Fall among all tablets sold, and eventually for total installed base as well. Any way you cut it, these events are likely to have a negative impact on Apple’s revenue in three important ways: overall iPad tablet sales, iPad per-unit profitability, and iPhone sales (which have already been surpassed by Android phone sales.) Apple’s Mac personal computer has been an iconic and profitable product for years despite having only about 13% of the U.S. PC market, but Apple’s iOs device strategies are predicated on a much greater market share, and Apple will have to act boldly over the next three to five years to avoid serious slippage in market share for the iPad, iPhone, and iPod Touch.

At the risk of admitting that I may have buried the lead here, I expect it will be equally interesting — and in this case we should have a very good idea over the next three to five months — to see how the emergence of the Google tablet affects Amazon’s Kindle offerings, by which I mean not only the array of devices but the wide and growing range of content that can be consumed on the Kindle Fire.

Like the Kindle and the iPod, the raison d’etre for the Google tablet is content consumption. The eInk Kindle and the Kindle Fire excel as content consumption devices, but even the Kindle Fire is not quite what we would like it to be when it comes to navigating the web, handling email, productivity uses, game play, and some other purposes. Google’s video presenters for the tablet and for the latest version of the Android platform are clearly taking aim at the Kindle Fire and the Nook when they say pointedly that “we’ve declared war on lagginess,” and for now at least they have certainly won a pivotal battle.

It’s important to remember, as we have seen repeatedly with the Kindle over the past few years, that it takes a lot more than having the best hardware to build dominant market share where personal electronic devices are concerned. While we loved the first three or four Kindle models (1, 2, 3, and DX) each in their own way as they came to market, what made Kindle the dominant ebook reader and transformed reading was the combination of the hardware with what I like to call the four C’s: customer base, catalog, convenience, and connectivity. From 1995 to late 2007 Amazon built an outrageously popular and well-stocked online bookstore that avid readers had already learned how to navigate, and with the launch of the Kindle made a seamless transition to even greater convenience and instantaneous-delivery connectivity.

The fact that Google has nailed the Nexus 7 tablet hardware does not mean that avid readers will come to see Google Play anytime soon as their go-to bookstore or, for that matter, their go-to online store for music or movies. Although Google uses some creative counting to claim the largest ebook catalog, the Kindle Store probably has an insurmountable lead among ebooks that are actually likely to be purchased  — one part of which is the fact that authors and publishers have given Amazon “Kindle exclusive” status for about 177,000 ebook titles at last count — and I’d be surprised if the Kindle ebook platform does not establish itself as the most popular ebook platform (and store) on Google’s tablet, just as it has on Apple’s tablet. If we see Google investing a great deal of cash in ebook price wars this Fall after the agency model is killed in the courts, it will be a strong signal that Google thinks it is worth the fight to try have its own ebook platform prevail over Kindle. But while Google’s pockets are much deeper even than Amazon’s, it will take more than price to compete with the Kindle’s bookselling prowess. Google’s bookstore is organized far better than the pathetically understocked iBookStore, but it falls far short of Amazon’s user-friendly search-and-browse infrastructure for both ebooks and print books.

Google Play may be much more competitive when it comes to music, movies, and apps. The combined power of the iTunes Store, Amazon’s MP3 Store and their respective clouds means that it will take a lot for Google to be a real contender with respect to music, but aggressive pricing and marketing could make a huge difference here. At least for now, neither Amazon’s nor Apple’s instant video offerings are available on the Google tablet, and Google’s App store is better stocked than Amazon’s. It will be interesting to see if Amazon is able to make deals for compatibility of its video and app offerings on the Nexus 7, but it’s hard to see why Google would want to go there.

Unfortunately, there are already some indications that Google, for all its cash, power, and virtuosity in several areas of its business, may not have the intense focus on customer experience necessary to push its Google Play content offerings anywhere near the head of the class. Perhaps I’m setting the bar high here after years of being spoiled by the stellar customer support offered 24/7 to Kindle owners, but my first couple of days with the Nexus 7 included some head-scratching moments, including:

  • I noticed online, before my unit arrived, that Google said it would come with a reasonably good selection of free preloaded content (including the movie Transformers: Dark of the Moon, a novel written by Robert Ludlum’s trademark, five popular magazines, and about 20 song tracks ranging from Merle Haggard to Busta Rhymes to Coldplay to the Stones.) Alas, said content was not present when my unit arrived. I called customer service and waited on hold for over 12 minutes before Tom picked up, which was over 11 minutes longer than I have ever waited to speak with a human in my dozens of calls to Kindle support during the past five years. Tom was surprised, but after he put me on hold for another four minutes he solved the problem.
  • The tablet’s front-facing camera seemed like a nice feature until I realized that there was no camera launcher pre-loaded onto the device. Eventually I found a useful free third-party camera launcher in the app store.
  • Google’s user manual for the device was not present on the Nexus 7 when I turned it on. I had to search for it on the web, find it in the Google Play store, and download it, only to find that it lacked much useful information, including, for instance, any reference to the camera or the preloaded content.
  • I’m fine with the fact that Google charged me $12.44 in Massachusetts sales tax for the Nexus 7. I wasn’t thrilled to be charged $13.99 for shipping, both because I was not given any options, because $13.99 seems like a lot fo two-day shipping of such a light, small package these days, and because, of course, I’ve grown accustomed to being charged exactly zilch for shipping when I order a Kindle. Of course Google does not have to do everything exactly like Amazon, but it seems worth mentioning here that my cost for the Google tablet was $225.43, not $199. On the other hand, I appreciated the fact that the device was supposed to come with a $25 credit for Google Play content, which would have made up for the additional cost if that $25 credit had actually arrived with the device. Instead, it arrived after I spoke to Tom in Google Support.

So it was a bit of a bumpy start, but I will get over it. Especially if I see plenty of evidence that Google knows how to do this customer support and customer experience thing. For people who use other Google commercial services like Blogger, Youtube, Adwords, Adsense, etc., Google is known for being a company where one can never reach a human being. Needless to say, that won’t work for Google’s latest business venture.

What’s the bottom line? If you were thinking of buying an iPad, I would strongly recommend that you try the Google tablet first. If you were thinking of buying a Kindle Fire, this Google tablet launch should give you pause. Amazon needs to act quickly to hold onto the Fire’s position in the face of this upstart, and that should mean — before the holidays — that we will see a new and improved Kindle Fire, with an even more appealing array of price points. Can Amazon compete at the high level at which Google has now set the bar? I’d be shocked if it didn’t step up, but we’ll see.

Publetariat Dispatch: Apple / Agency 5 Antitrust Suit: Settlement News From the Trenches

Publetariat: For People Who Publish!In today’s Publetariat Dispatch, Publetariat shares a roundup of news about the United States’ Justice Department’s antitrust lawsuit against Apple and five large publishers.

It was announced today that the U.S. Justice Department is filing its long-anticipated antitrust lawsuit against Apple, Inc. and the “Agency 5” publishers who are charged with colluding with Apple to fix prices on ebooks. Three of the five publishers immediately moved to settle out of court, though Penguin, Macmillan and Apple itself are digging in their heels and maintaining they are innocent of the charges.

Bloomberg News is reporting  that when the U.S. Justice Department officially moved to file suit  against Apple and the “Agency 5″, all but Apple and one of the  publishers named in the suit negotiated a settlement. From Bloomberg:

The U.S. sued Apple Inc. (AAPL), Hachette SA, HarperCollins, Macmillan, Penguin and Simon & Schuster in New York district court, claiming the publishers colluded to fix eBook prices.

CBS Corp. (CBS)’s Simon & Schuster, Lagardère SCA’s Hachette Book Group and News Corp. (NWSA)’s HarperCollins settled their suits today, two people familiar with the cases said…

Apple and Macmillan, which have refused to engage in settlement talks with the Justice Department,  deny they colluded to raise prices for digital books, according to  people familiar with the matter. They will argue that pricing agreements  between Apple and publishers enhanced competition in the e-book  industry, which was dominated by Amazon.com Inc. (AMZN)

 

You can read the full Bloomberg report here. A report on Fox Business offers some settlement details:

If the settlement reached with the other three publishers  is approved, retailers such as Amazon and Barnes & Noble could once  again set the price of books sold via their outlets. The settlement  also requires the publishers to terminate their anticompetitive  most-favored-nation agreements with Apple and other e-books retailers,  Holder said.

“In addition, the companies will be prohibited for two years from  placing constraints on retailers’ ability to offer discounts to  consumers.  They will also be prohibited from conspiring or sharing  competitively sensitive information with their competitors for five  years,” the statement reads.

 

Over on Slate, no less than three news and opinion pieces have been posted in the wake of today’s news. In If Apple and Publishers Plotted, They Didn’t Need to, Reynolds Holding argues:

If Apple and a clutch of publishers plotted together, they didn’t need  to. U.S. trustbusters say the iPad maker and five electronic book  producers conspired to raise download prices. But the model they came up  with makes sense even without collusion, giving the publishers perhaps  their best chance of survival.

The book business has changed radically in recent years. The old model  of selling wholesale and letting retailers set prices worked fine in the  world of printed books and bricks-and-mortar stores. But the arrival of  digital tomes allowed Amazon, for one, to slice prices to $9.99 per  e-book, providing relatively cheap content that helped make its Kindle  e-reader gadgets popular. Prices like that ate into publishers’ profit  margins.

But Holding is mistaken. Amazon’s pre-Agency deal with publishers had Amazon paying publishers’ their usual wholesale cut, which was based on publishers’ suggested retail prices. When Amazon slashed prices on mainstream bestselling Kindle books to $9.99 or less, it meant no less profit for publishers, but that Amazon had to take a loss on almost every one of those sales. Amazon is no stranger to the loss-leader strategy of obtaining market dominance however, so it was prepared to take the hit—for years, if need be.
This is partly why consumers and consumer watchdogs have been crying, “Foul!” over the claims of publishers and their supporters that Amazon’s pre-Agency ability to set its own pricing was in some way harming the publishers.

Publetariat Dispatch: Konrath v. Turow, RE: Amazon

Publetariat: For People Who Publish!In today’s Publetariat Dispatch, we share some recent volleys from both sides in the Department of Justice’s ongoing antitrust suit against Apple and five large publishers.

On March 9, Authors Guild President Scott Turow posted an open letter on the Authors Guild site, calling the announcement that the U.S. Justice Department was near to filing an antitrust lawsuit against Apple and five large publishers (often referred to as The Agency 5, as these are the publishers who immediately signed on for Apple’s agency pricing scheme) “grim news”.

Author J.A. Konrath offered a fairly scathing blog post in counterpoint on March 16, calling Turow out for supporting publishers over the interests of authors—even the very authors whose interests Turow is supposed to be protecting and furthering in his role as President of the AG.

Here’s just one thread of Konrath’s post, in which he addresses Turow’s contention that allowing Amazon to become the dominant player in the ebook market would be somehow disastrous:

——————————————————————————————–

 

Scott  said: “Look, if what they’re into is maximizing profits, then if they  were to have a monopoly there’d be no rationale not to use the monopoly  power to increase prices to consumers. That  is historically what monopolies do. There is plenty of precedent for  that. It’s only rational to fear what they’re going to do with this  accumulation of power.”
 
That’s historically what monopolies do? Okay, so show me the precedent.
 
Microsoft  has pretty much dominated the market with Windows. Has Windows become  more expensive since it first launched because MS has a monopoly on  operating systems?
 
It launched in 1985 for $99.00. In today’s dollars that equals $212.00
 
The latest version of Windows is $179.00.
 
But Amazon must have a track record for doing this, right?
 
When  the Kindle was released in 2007, it was $399. Now that is has an  overwhelming market share, how much did Amazon jack up the price?
 
The Kindle Fire is $199. The bare-bones Kindle is $79.
 
Hmm…
 
I’m  old enough to remember Ma Bell having a true monopoly on telephones.  You had no choice. You couldn’t even own your own phone–you had to rent  from them.
 
Am I off base, or did prices seem to get higher once the Department of Justice broke them up?
 
Monsanto  owns 98% of the US soybean market, and 79% of the corn market. Last I  checked, both corn and soy were still pretty cheap.
 
Where  is all this precedent? Can’t Turow offer a single example? Just one to  show the bad things that happen when a single company controls an  industry?
 
Certainly  OPEC is an example, but that’s a cartel, not a single company. They all  agree on the price of oil, and we’ve seen how crazy oil prices have  become. We’re hitting $4.00 for a gallon of gas in Chicago right now.  All because they collude to fix prices.
 
I mean, four bucks for gas is outrageous. It’s almost as bad as paying $14.99 for an ebook.
 
Hmm. That’s sort of ironic, isn’t it? Because the Big 6 also fit the definition of a cartel, and they’re being investigated for collusion.
 
Seems  like cartels want to keep prices high, when Amazon wants to lower them.  That’s the reason the Big 6 colluded, remember? Amazon was selling  ebooks for less than the cartel wanted them to be sold for. So the Big 6  forced Amazon to take the agency deal, resulting in LESS MONEY FOR  AUTHORS.
 
I  put that in caps because Turow and the Authors Guild support the agency  model, when authors make less money from the agency model. And the  rationale behind it is so funny it hurts:
The  Big 6 wanted to control ebook pricing so they could keep the prices  high, because they were afraid of Amazon becoming a monopoly which might  raise the price of ebooks.
 
 
Read the full post on JA Konrath’s blog, A Newbie’s Guide to Publishing. Seriously, read the whole thing, and then make up your own mind as to whether or not Turow is on the right side of this argument.

Amazon Announces Updates for Kindle for iOS, Kindle Cloud Reader, and Kindle for Android Apps

Amazon’s Kindle team has just released updates across our Kindle for iOS, Kindle Cloud Reader, and Kindle for Android apps. Here’s what Amazon says about them:

Kindle for iPad, Kindle Cloud Reader, and Kindle for Android now support children’s books, comics, and graphic novels. Children’s books come to life with brilliant images, fixed layouts, and Kindle Text Pop-Up for supported titles to magnify text for easy reading on any size screen. Comics and graphic novels are presented in Kindle Panel View for supported titles, showcasing the artwork in a panel by panel experience that reads as the author intended. Over 1000 children’s and comic book titles in full color are now available on Kindle Fire, Kindle for Android, Kindle for iPad, and Kindle Cloud Reader.

In addition, Kindle for iOS adds library search by title and author, and iPad users receive a cleaner reading experience with smaller margins to help you focus on the author’s words. Kindle for Android Tablets and Kindle Cloud Reader also now include a two-page view for widescreen displays.

We hope you enjoy the new updates!

Publetariat Dispatch: Thirteen O’Clock Australian Dark Fiction News & Reviews – Launched

Publetariat: For People Who Publish!

In today’s Publetariat Dispatch, author Alan Baxter shares a new site for fans of horror and supernatural thrillers.

I’m very happy to be able to officially announce this new venture.  Myself and writers Andrew McKiernan and Felicity Dowker have put  together a new website, to fill a void in the Australian dark and weird  fiction scene.

Since the untimely demise of Horrorscope, there’s been a  gap where good dark and weird fiction can be reviewed and reported.  We’re hoping to fill that gap with Thirteen O’Clock. And, after all, you can’t have too many sources of news and reviews in this game. Here are the relevant links:

Thirteen O’Clock website.

Thirteen O’Clock on Facebook.

Thirteen O’Clock on Twitter.

All the details are in the official press release, here.

 

This is a reprint from Alan Baxter‘s The Word.

How Kindle Owners and Readers Can Make Their Voices Heard in the DOJ “Agency Model” Antitrust Lawsuit Against eBook Price-Fixing by Apple and the Big Publishers

Most Kindle Nation Daily readers are aware that the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has filed a major antitrust lawsuit against Apple and the five original “agency model” publishers charging them with a massive price-fixing conspiracy in violation of federal law. But you may not be aware that the DOJ Antitrust Division wants to hear from members of the public during a 60-day comment period on the lawsuit.

If you believe that you have been affected my agency-model price-fixing and would like to share your concerns with the Department of Justice and the parties in this lawsuit before the proposed Final Judgment takes effect, you should put your concerns in writing and submit them no later than June 22, 2012.

Under the provisions of a notice published in the Federal Register on April 24, 2012, written comments should be submitted to:

John Read, Chief
Litigation III Section
Antitrust Division
U.S. Department of Justice
450 5th Street, NW, Suite 4000 Washington, DC 20530

“All comments received during this period will be considered by the United States Department of Justice, which remains free to withdraw its consent to the proposed Final Judgment at any time prior to the Court’s entry of judgment. The comments and the responses of the United States will be filed with the Court and published in the Federal Register,” states the notice.

Why not just leave all this up to the government and the lawyers for it and the defendants?

Well, suffice it to say that individuals and groups associated with the defendants are sounding off through the comment process, and they are making very strong claims to the general effect that DOJ’s efforts to protect consumers against ebook price-fixing are misguided, because the DOJ should instead be protecting the interests and the distribution infrastructure of the same publishers who colluded with Apple to raise ebook prices by 30 to 100 percent back in 2010.

For all the public documents as well as our coverage of the lawsuit, please check out the Federal Register notice and our April 19, 2012 post, “The Gang That Couldn’t Shoot Straight: How Apple and 5 Big Publishers Almost Got Away with a Massive Price-Fixing Conspiracy to Try to Turn Back the Kindle Revolution, and What It Will Mean for Readers, Authors, and Publishers Going Forward.”

We’ll share our Kindle Nation Daily public comment on the case, as well as those of some industry players, in the near future.