2015 ended on a sour note for Apple, as its antitrust legal battle continues. The battle began in 2012 when federal and state authorities charged Apple and five publishers (Hachette, HarperCollins, Macmillan, Penguin and Simon & Schuster) with conspiring to raise the price of e-books from $9.99 to $12.99 and up. In 2013, following a three week trial, the U.S. District Court in Manhattan ruled against Apple, stating that Apple was the ringleader in an industrywide conspiracy to increase the prices of digital books.

In June 2015, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upheld that ruling in a 2-to-1 vote, reported the New York Times.

“We conclude that the district court’s decision that Apple orchestrated a horizontal conspiracy among the publisher defendants to raise e-book prices is amply supported and well reasoned, and that the agreement unreasonably restrained trade,” the appeals court wrote in its decision.

Following the ruling, Josh Rosenstock, an Apple spokesman, denied the allegations:

“Apple did not conspire to fix e-book pricing and this ruling does nothing to change the facts,” Rosenstock said. “We are disappointed the court does not recognize the innovation and choice the iBooks Store brought for consumers. While we want to put this behind us, the case is about principles and values. We know we did nothing wrong back in 2010 and are assessing next steps.”

Those “next steps” have included included Apple asking the Supreme Court to hear its side of the story, reported MediaPost. What’s different this time around? According to MediaPost, Apple has gotten the support of organizations like The Authors Guild who says Apple helped authors by making the industry more competitive.

In December, the DOJ urged the Supreme Court to refuse to hear Apple’s appeal, said MediaPost. In the 32-page filing, the DOJ said Apple “orchestrated the publishers’ conspiracy and actively relied on their collusion to achieve its business ends.” The DOJ says that price-fixing isn’t an acceptable way to increase competition.

What’s next? Apple can reply via court brief, after which the Supreme Court will decide whether or not to take the case. If the Supreme Court rejects Apple’s appeal, Apple could be liable for up to $400 million in consumer refunds, said Publishers Weekly. That sounds like a pretty good reason for Apple to exhaust all of its legal remedies first.

Insider Take:

Big tech behemoth Apple yields a lot of market power, but it looks like it may have painted itself into a corner this time in a case of “too little, too late.” It is a tough lesson to learn, but it is hard to feel sympathy for them. Apple took a big risk, and it lost.

Regardless of what Apple thinks, there is a perception in the market that it played a heavy hand to determine pricing, reaching across the industry to get big publishers involved. There’s no way around it – that’s not OK, Apple. It doesn’t look like the Supreme Court is going to be OK with it either. We anticipate the Supreme Court will deny Apple’s request to hear the case, regardless of Apple’s deep pockets, legal team and market influence.

Because of the $400 million price tag and the desire to save face, we expect Apple to keep plugging away, perhaps finding another angle to go back to court with. Lesson learned: regardless of size, all companies must play by the rules or face serious consequences. No one is immune, not even Apple.