Courtesy of Publishers Weekly:
The first words of its filing say it all: “Apple has not settled with the Government.” Within the tight five-page limit imposed by Denise Cote, Apple yesterday voiced opposition to the government’s proposed settlement with three publishers (Hachette, Simon & Schuster, and HarperCollins) in its e-book price-fixing case, arguing that the company stands to be punished by the deal though it never “participated in, encouraged, or sought to benefit from collusion,” and assailing a deal that would harm the company by nullifying contracts “before a single document has been introduced into evidence.” Apple urged the court to do one of two things: approve a more narrowly focused settlement that bars collusion; or reserve final judgment on the settlement until the company has had their day in court. In addition to Apple, the two non-settling publishers (Penguin and Macmillan) also filed opposition briefs.
“The need for a trial on hotly-contested issues affecting the eBook industry is clear,” the Apple brief states. “And delaying judgment would avoid imposing a settlement on Apple that implicates contracts that Apple is entitled to defend at trial.” That trial, which is on track for next summer, Apple argues, would allow the court to make determinations based on “admissible evidence,” whether Apple conspired with publishers.
“Apple respectfully submits that the Court should not simply take the Government’s word for it now and impose a penalty on Apple before it has had its day in court.” Simply terminating Apple’s contracts without proving a case in court, the brief states, would be unprecedented, and would cause “irreparable harm.” Apple also insists that if the deal is quickly approved, it would immediately appeal.
You can read the much meatier article in its entirety here: Apple, Publishers File Opposition to Proposed DOJ Settlement