Judging from Judge Cote's past performance, the odds are in Amazon's favor.
FORTUNE -- In another context -- or another courthouse -- the remedies the Justice Department and 33 states proposed Friday to address what they call Apple's (AAPL) "illegal conduct" in the e-book market might seem like an unreasonable intrusion by a government agency into a private company's business practices.
Among other things, the DOJ is demanding that Apple let Amazon MOREPhilip Elmer-DeWitt - Aug 2, 2013 1:05 PM ET
Catching up to the demo BTIG's Rich Greenfield posted earlier this week on YouTube.
FORTUNE -- Apple (AAPL) senior VP Eddy Cue showed up late to the e-book antitrust trial last month because he was busy nailing down the final iTunes Radio contracts in advance of the June 10 WWDC keynote.
And I was so busy Wednesday trying to wrap my head around Judge Denise Cote's decision in that case -- in which MOREPhilip Elmer-DeWitt - Jul 13, 2013 6:22 PM ET
I thought the judge was coming around to Apple's point of view. I was wrong.
FORTUNE -- The benches were hard. The courtroom was over-cooled. The reporting challenges were daunting (no Wi-Fi, no cellphones, no laptops). But the drama that unfolded over three weeks of testimony was compelling, and I was happy to be one of a handful of reporters who sat through the whole thing.
I thought I had a good handle MOREPhilip Elmer-DeWitt - Jul 11, 2013 8:28 AM ET
Apple's appeal of the trial judge's verdict will hinge on the last 38 pages of her decision.
FORTUNE -- The first 122 pages of the 160-page ruling against Apple (AAPL) that U.S. District Judge Denise Cote handed down on Wednesday could have been written before the trial began.
In fact, most of them probably were.
Judge Cote was familiar with the case from having supervised the proceedings by which the five so-called Publisher MOREPhilip Elmer-DeWitt - Jul 10, 2013 1:30 PM ET
Judge: "Apple seized the moment and brilliantly played its hand."
FORTUNE -- In a 160-page ruling following a three-week bench trial, U.S. District Judge Denise Cote has found that Apple (AAPL) did indeed violate the Sherman antitrust act by conspiring with five publishers to raise the price of e-books.
The key paragraph:
"The Plaintiffs have shown that the Publisher Defendants conspired with each other to eliminate retail price competition in order to raise MOREPhilip Elmer-DeWitt - Jul 10, 2013 10:06 AM ET
The government's e-book antitrust case against Apple makes perfect sense -- so long as you don't ask why Amazon was pricing below cost.
By Roger Parloff, senior editor
FORTUNE -- By the time summations concluded last week in the government's e-book antitrust suit against Apple, Apple had amply vindicated CEO Tim Cook's out-of-court characterization of the case as "bizarre."
Yet it still might not win. On the contrary, if federal judges read MOREJun 25, 2013 2:51 PM ET
Squeezed by Amazon, the No. 2 maker of e-readers is exiting the color tablet business.
FORTUNE -- If Apple (AAPL) manages to win U.S.A. v. Apple, the e-book antitrust suit that closed last week, it will be thanks in large part to the testimony of Theresa Horner, Barnes & Noble's (BKS) vice president of digital content.
It was her story about what the e-book market looked like to Barnes & Noble in late 2009 MOREPhilip Elmer-DeWitt - Jun 25, 2013 12:43 PM ET
What do the patterns in Judge Cote's queries tell us about where the case is headed?
FORTUNE -- Veteran court watchers will tell you that it's dangerous to read too much into the questions judges ask during closing arguments in a trial. Some are probing, some are rhetorical, and in some cases the judge may be playing devil's advocate, seeming to take positions he or she doesn't actually hold.
Still, in a MOREPhilip Elmer-DeWitt - Jun 23, 2013 12:55 PM ET
It's as if Apple and the U.S. government were talking about two different cases.
FORTUNE -- "At some level, this is an old fashioned price fixing case," Mark Ryan told the court as he presented the government's closing arguments in U.S.A. v. Apple -- the e-book antitrust case that ended Thursday with summations from both sides.
Ryan started, as he put it, at the end of the story -- with the chart MOREPhilip Elmer-DeWitt - Jun 21, 2013 10:54 AM ET
Closing arguments are set for Thursday, and things are looking up for Apple.
FORTUNE -- It may be telling that before the case went to trial the Department of Justice thought it would need 30 hours to prove that Apple (AAPL) had conspired with five book publishers to raise the price of e-books, while Apple's lawyers only wanted 27 hours to defend their client. The two sides settled on 29 hours MOREPhilip Elmer-DeWitt - Jun 20, 2013 7:02 AM ET
|Instagram launches direct messaging|
|Military retirees: You betrayed us, Congress|
|I work 4 jobs and I'm still struggling|
|Foxconn improves worker conditions, but hours still excessive - report|
|Stocks sink as disappointing December continues|