USPS Files With PRC to Establish Mail Growth Incentives

The Book Manufacturers’ Institute (BMI) released the January results for its monthly survey on capacity and lead times for soft cover and hard cover books. This month showed both capacities and lead times continuing to decline. According to responses regarding hard cover books, the average manufacturer was running at 72% of their capacity, down from December’s 82%. The average lead time for completed hard cover books went down to 48 days from 50 days, continuing the trend. For soft cover books, capacity usage dropped to 75% compared to 82% last month. The average lead time dropped to 29 days from 33 days, continuing that trend as well.

ACMA's Legal Team Successfully Leads Online Seller Newegg in 'Bama. While not necessarily a precursor to the forthcoming Supreme Court decision in South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc., we're excited to report a significant win for ACMA’s lawyers at Brann & Isaacson. Yesterday, the Alabama Tax Tribunal ruled in favor of e-commerce merchant Newegg in its challenge when the Alabama Department of Revenue sought enforcement of its economic nexus regulation in 2016. This ruling negates the first significant “Kill Quill” measure by Alabama Commissioner of Revenue Julie Magee, to promulgate the rule that required companies such as Newegg to register to collect the sales tax even though they did not have a physical presence. Newegg was one of the few companies that fought the Department. Click Read More below for additional information.

Penguin Random House’s attorneys responded today to the Department of Justice’s efforts to block its acquisition of Simon & Schuster, attacking the government’s main complaint, that the purchase would “likely result in substantial harm to authors of anticipated top-selling books and ultimately, consumers.” In filing its suit to block the deal November 2, the DOJ said that a combined PRH-S&S, along with HarperCollins, “would collectively control more than two-thirds of this market, leaving hundreds of authors with fewer alternatives and less leverage.” PRH attacks this charge on several levels and begins by calling the theory of a “top-selling” category “fiction,” noting that the government doesn’t even identify what size of an advance it is referring to. “The publishing industry does not divide the market for book rights into distinct categories based on the author’s compensation for the book,” PRH’s lawyers said.” “The royalty advance for a proposed book is driven mainly by the reader demand a particular editor anticipates for that particular book.”