OFT Investigates Possible RPM in Relation to E-books
Client Alert | 1 min read | 02.02.11
The OFT has confirmed that it is investigating the pricing of e-books in the UK following "a significant number of complaints". Targets of the investigation appear to include Pearson and Lagadère.
The issue under investigation is apparently an "agency pricing" model adopted by certain publishers under which the publisher sets the retail price (rather than the on-line retailer). On its face the issue under investigation therefore appears to be resale price maintenance ("RPM").
This would be unusual as the OFT has traditionally senior management have historically been skeptical of the value of pursuing standard RPM cases. One possible explanation is that, at least in the US where a similar investigation by attorney generals in Connecticut and Texas is underway, Apple appears to have played a coordinating role in persuading publishers to adopt the agency model. In other words, there may be some suggestion of hub-and-spoke cartel type conduct. Certainly there have been allegations of horizontal coordination between competitors in the other recent on-line RPM investigation by the OFT, which relates to on-line hotel bookings.
A second possible explanation is that the publication by the European Commission of its revised Guidelines on Vertical Restraints – which include an extended section on RPM – has led to a renewed interest in RPM issues among antitrust enforcers in Europe. That would be consistent with rumors that the Commission is itself considering pursuing investigations in this area.
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 05.28.26
Earlier this month, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) withdrew a February 2024 Biden administration proposed rule, “Definition of Hazardous Waste Applicable to Corrective Action for Releases From Solid Waste Management Units,” under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).[1] The withdrawn proposal would have revised RCRA corrective action regulations to expressly apply the broader statutory definition of “hazardous waste,” rather than only the narrower regulatory definition. Now, EPA is maintaining the status quo for corrective action under RCRA. However, EPA’s withdrawal of its proposed RCRA hazardous waste definition makes no mention of its corresponding proposal from 2024 to list nine per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) as RCRA hazardous constituents.[2] This disjointed withdrawal, while providing some certainty for regulated entities, does not resolve how EPA plans to address PFAS under the RCRA program.
Client Alert | 8 min read | 05.28.26
Texas Targets Big Tech With Wave of Suits and Investigations, Part of Nationwide Trend
Client Alert | 7 min read | 05.27.26
Colorado Hits Reset on AI Regulation: SB 26-189 Repeals and Reenacts the Colorado AI Act
Client Alert | 3 min read | 05.27.26
Don’t Get Left in the Doghouse: The Federal Circuit’s Global K9 Case and the Duty to Intervene
