The judge overseeing the American Booksellers Association antitrust lawsuit against Borders and Barnes & Noble has granted a request by the ABA to file an amended complaint that will include both companies' online and mail-order subsidiaries. According to ABA attorney Jerry Jacobs, the association filed the motion to ensure that such operations as B&N's barnesandnoble.com and Marboro Books as well as Borders's borders.com subsidiaries would be bound by any judgment or settlement reached in the suit.
B&N objected to the ABA's motion on the grounds that including bn.com and Marboro would cause "undue delay" and result in "undue prejudice" to B&N by expanding the scope of the litigation. B&N contended that the suit is focused only on retail bookstore sales. In rejecting B&N's argument, Judge William Orrik noted that in its original complaint, ABA made reference to the defendants' book sales by mail order and through the Internet as well as their sales in retail stores. In addition, Judge Orrik ruled that B&N had failed to show any undue delay and undue prejudice arising from the request for an amended complaint.
Bn.com said it will vigorously defend itself against the action.
The suit was first filed by the ABA and 26 independent booksellers in March 1988. It charges that the two chains receive secret discounts and other favorable terms from book publishers and distributors that are not available to independent booksellers.
The parties are about halfway through through the discovery stage, and Judge Orrik is expected to set a trial date on December 2.
