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 | 06.03.26
Important EU Court Judgment Clarifies Rules on Interest Due in Cartel Damages Cases
In a judgment that will have direct and immediate consequences, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has clarified that for all competition damages actions brought after 26 December 2014, interest runs from the date on which the harm occurred. The ruling addressed two important questions: (1) whether national provisions implementing Article 3(2) of the EU Damages Directive — which requires interest to run from the date harm occurred —apply to cases in which the harm preceded the adoption of those provisions; and (2) how the date of harm should be determined in cartel cases involving the purchase of goods at inflated prices.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 06.02.26
SBA OHA Confirms That the Submission Date for a Proposal with Pricing Controls Size Determination
Client Alert | 5 min read | 06.01.26
California Court Upholds Insurer’s Duty to Defend After Covered Claim Is Dismissed
Client Alert | 2 min read | 05.29.26
California Assembly Passes AB 1776, Sending Major Antitrust Bill to the Senate
