Lawsuit Claims Apple and Amazon Conspired to Raise iPad and iPhone Prices

Lawsuit Claims Apple and Amazon Conspired to Raise iPad and iPhone Prices

Amazon has become the retail behemoth it is in part thanks to third-party sellers. Amazon doesn’t need to stock or ship many of the things sold on the site, giving it a much wider selection than smaller competitors. One notable exception is Apple, which has an agreement in place with Amazon to limit the number of sellers allowed to list its products. A new lawsuit claims this is an unlawful violation of antitrust law that has cost consumers big bucks.

As recently as 2018, there were more than 600 entities selling Apple products on Amazon. This ensured robust competition, which kept prices a bit lower than Apple’s own store. However, that all changed in late 2018 when Amazon and Apple teamed up to bring more Apple hardware to the site. As part of the agreement, Amazon would only allow third parties to sell Apple hardware if they were approved by Apple. Today, there are just seven companies offering the products on Amazon.

According to the law firm Hagens Berman, which has filed a class-action antitrust case, Apple and Amazon have benefited hugely from the agreement while consumers have been paying higher prices. Amazon reportedly got access to a continuous supply of Apple devices to sell at a 10 percent discount, provided it kept third-party sellers off the site. The suit claims this is known as “naked restraint,” and is illegal under the Sherman Antitrust Act.

Lawsuit Claims Apple and Amazon Conspired to Raise iPad and iPhone Prices

Following the start of the retail agreement in January 2019, Amazon became much more likely to get placement in the “buy box,” increasing its revenue from Apple devices. Apple, meanwhile, no longer had to worry about sellers on Amazon undercutting it. The suit contends that buyers are paying up to 20 percent more than they otherwise would. There is some precedent for this case. Italian regulators slapped Amazon with a fine last year for a similar deal involving Apple’s Beats audio products, reports Ars Technica.

Hagens Berman will be familiar to those who follow Apple news. The firm was involved in numerous legal actions against Apple over the years, including the ebook price-fixing case and a battle over touchscreen patents. Hagens Berman clearly feels there’s money to be made going after Apple, and this time, consumers might be able to benefit. The law firm is asking anyone who purchased an Apple product via the Amazon buy box in 2019 or later to join the class action. In a few years, you might get part of your purchase refunded, and Hagens Berman will get a big heap of cash.

Continue reading

Pfizer Claims New COVID-19 Vaccine 90 Percent Effective
Pfizer Claims New COVID-19 Vaccine 90 Percent Effective

There have been a number of COVID-19 vaccines in development in the United States and around the world, and one of them has shown some very positive preliminary results in its Phase 3 trial. One particular vaccine developed by Pfizer and German firm BioNTech appears to be more than 90 percent effective in preventing symptomatic…

Intel Rocket Lake Leaks Claim the Core i9-11900K Will Be a $600 CPU
Intel Rocket Lake Leaks Claim the Core i9-11900K Will Be a $600 CPU

Intel may be raising prices with Rocket Lake if new leaks are accurate. Bold move, but with the current shortage, possibly a smart one.

States Claim Google’s ‘Privacy Sandbox’ Violates Antitrust Law
States Claim Google’s ‘Privacy Sandbox’ Violates Antitrust Law

Google finds itself in an impossible position. Privacy advocates have long demanded Google follow Microsoft and Mozilla's lead in purging tracking cookies from Chrome. Now that it's doing so, state attorneys general have filed an amended antitrust complaint that uses the so-called "Privacy Sandbox" as ammunition against the company.

ARM Founder Claims Nvidia Will Compete Unfairly, Fails to Explain Why
ARM Founder Claims Nvidia Will Compete Unfairly, Fails to Explain Why

ARM's co-founder is claiming that Nvidia's Grace is proof the company will abuse its power if allowed to buy ARM, but he hasn't really explained how.