Item 3. Legal Proceedings

| --- | --- |

The Company is subject to the legal proceedings and claims discussed below as well as certain other legal proceedings and claims that have not been fully resolved and that have arisen in the ordinary course of business. In the opinion of management, there was not at least a reasonable possibility the Company may have incurred a material loss, or a material loss in excess of a recorded accrual, with respect to loss contingencies for asserted legal and other claims. However, the outcome of legal proceedings and claims brought against the Company is subject to significant uncertainty. Therefore, although management considers the likelihood of such an outcome to be remote, if one or more of these legal matters were resolved against the Company in a reporting period for amounts in excess of management’s expectations, the Company’s consolidated financial statements for that reporting period could be materially adversely affected. See the risk factor “The Company could be impacted by unfavorable results of legal proceedings, such as being found to have infringed on intellectual property rights” in Part I, Item 1A of this Form 10-K under the heading “Risk Factors.” The Company settled certain matters during the fourth quarter of 2015 that did not individually or in the aggregate have a material impact on the Company’s financial condition or operating results.

Apple eBooks Antitrust Litigation (United States of America v. Apple Inc., et al.)

On April 11, 2012, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a civil antitrust action against the Company and five major book publishers in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, alleging an unreasonable restraint of interstate trade and commerce in violation of §1 of the Sherman Act and seeking, among other things, injunctive relief, the District Court’s declaration that the Company’s agency agreements with the publishers are null and void and/or the District Court’s reformation of such agreements. On July 10, 2013, the District Court found, following a bench trial, that the Company conspired to restrain trade in violation of §1 of the Sherman Act and relevant state statutes to the extent those laws are congruent with §1 of the Sherman Act. The District Court entered a permanent injunction, which took effect on October 6, 2013 and will be in effect for five years unless the judgment is overturned on appeal. The Company has taken the necessary steps to comply with the terms of the District Court’s order, including renegotiating agreements with the five major eBook publishers, updating its antitrust training program and completing a two-year monitorship with a court-appointed antitrust compliance monitor, whose appointment the District Court ended in October 2015. The Company appealed the District Court’s decision. Pursuant to a settlement agreement reached in June 2014, any damages the Company may be obligated to pay will be determined by the outcome of the final adjudication following exhaustion of all appeals.