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 | 2 min read | 11.14.25
Claim construction is a key stage of most patent litigations, where the court must decide the meaning of any disputed terms in the patent claims. Generally, claim terms are given their plain and ordinary meaning except under two circumstances: (1) when the patentee acts as its own lexicographer and sets out a definition for the term; and (2) when the patentee disavows the full scope of the term either in the specification or during prosecution. Thorner v. Sony Comput. Ent. Am. LLC, 669 F.3d 1362, 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2012). The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Aortic Innovations LLC v. Edwards Lifesciences Corp. highlights that patentees can act as their own lexicographers through consistent, interchangeable usage of terms across the specification, effectively defining terms by implication.
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.14.25
Microplastics Update: Regulatory and Litigation Developments in 2025
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.13.25
