Prompted by questions from defense attorney Daniel Petrocelli representing Bertelsmann and Penguin Random House, Dohle became animated and gave an impassioned tribute to the creativity of the publishing industry, which he portrayed as a fiercely competitive marketplace. "It would be sort of very gentlemanly and sort of, 'After you' and 'After you,'" he said, gesturing with a polite sweep of the arm. "You might as well say you're going to have a husband and wife bidding against each other for the same house," he quipped. The publishers' promise of continued competitive bidding by the two companies after a merger was greeted with skepticism by an unusual witness at the trial Tuesday - King, who testified for the government even though he is published by Simon & Schuster. It would benefit readers, booksellers and authors, they say. The publishers counter that the merger would strengthen competition among publishers to find and sell the hottest books by enabling the combined company to offer bigger advances and marketing support to authors. Melissa Bank: Author of 'The Girls' Guide to Hunting and Fishing' dies at 61 The new company, if approved, would be by far the biggest book publishing entity in U.S. and how much authors are paid, giving consumers fewer books to choose from. media and entertainment company Paramount Global would thwart competition and give Penguin Random House outsize influence over what books are published in the U.S. The government contends that allowing Bertelsmann to buy Simon & Schuster from U.S. The other three are HarperCollins Publishers, Hachette Book Group and Macmillan. publisher, which would reduce the so-called "Big Five" U.S. Justice Department has sued to block the proposed $2.2 billion merger of Penguin Random House with Simon & Schuster, the fourth-largest U.S. Dohle not only acknowledged his promise was not legally binding, but should he ever leave Bertelsmann his successor would not be obligated to continue competitive bidding between the imprints. Speaking of Simon & Schuster's position in bidding after a merger, Dohle said, "We want to keep them as external and independent as possible." Dohle has assured agents that he would permit competitive bidding between Simon & Schuster and Penguin Random House imprints even if no other publisher was in contention, an expansion upon the current PRH policy of allowing bidding between imprints as long as outside competitors were still in the running. Stephen King: Author testifies against longtime publisher Simon & Schuster in books merger trial Books that sell well are more likely to have received bigger advances, Dohle acknowledged. Advances, which reach into the millions for such top-selling authors as Stephen King and James Patterson, are guaranteed payments to writers that can affect a book's profitability. Under questioning at a federal antitrust trial, CEO Markus Dohle also admitted that while he has promised to allow the two merged companies to continue to bid against each other for deals with authors, Penguin Random House's German parent firm Bertelsmann has no legal obligation to honor that commitment.Ĭommenting on what has been a core government argument, Dohle allowed that smaller advance payments to authors can lead to fewer books being published. But he acknowledged that the merger would buttress his company's position as the biggest U.S. WASHINGTON (AP) - The head of publishing titan Penguin Random House on Thursday defended his company's deal to acquire rival Simon & Schuster against the government's claim it would thwart competition. My reaction is our procedures are following what we have been told we have to do.Watch Video: NYC library: Youths read banned books online free "I guess I'm a little surprised because this is going on all over the state of Florida, not just here. "We have been removing books that have been called inappropriate, pornography," he said. However, Bill Slayton, a member of the school board, told NBC News correspondent Antonia Hylton that he was surprised by the lawsuit because the school board and the superintendent have been following state law. Neither the district nor the school board immediately responded to requests for comment. Government action may not be premised on such discriminatory motivations.” “The clear agenda behind the campaign to remove the books is to categorically remove all discussion of racial discrimination or LGBTQ issues from public school libraries. They also argued that the removals violate the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment “because the books being singled out for possible removal are disproportionately books by non-white and/or LGBTQ authors, or which address topics related to race or LGBTQ identity.”
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |