Sept 17 (Reuters) - Amazon.com ( AMZN ) has asked a U.S. judge to

dismiss what it called a "far-fetched" lawsuit by independent

authors accusing the e-commerce giant of monopolizing the retail

market for audiobooks and causing them to overpay for the

distribution of their works.

In a filing in Manhattan federal court, Amazon ( AMZN ) on Monday

night defended the 90-day exclusivity provision that its digital

audiobook subsidiary Audible offers to self-published authors.

Amazon ( AMZN ) also said the market for audiobooks was competitive,

with Apple and Google offering rival platforms.

Author Christine DeMaio, who publishes under the name CD

Reiss, alleged in her June lawsuit that Amazon ( AMZN ) violates U.S.

antitrust law by charging higher fees for writers who decline to

participate in Audible's exclusivity program.

Amazon ( AMZN ) and lawyers for Reiss did not immediately respond to

requests for comment on Tuesday.

Amazon ( AMZN ) bought Audible for about $300 million in 2008. The

lawsuit called Audible the world's largest audiobook retailer,

accounting for more than 60% of domestic purchasing compared

with about 20% for Apple.

Industry-wide sales of audiobooks have steadily risen in

recent years, reaching nearly $2 billion in 2022, according to

the lawsuit.

Amazon's ( AMZN ) exclusivity program offers self-published authors

40% royalties for the distribution of their work, compared with

25% for authors who chose non-exclusive, competitive

distribution.

Amazon's ( AMZN ) filing said its optional exclusivity provisions,

which do not apply to top-sellers from major publishers, are

"limited in both duration and share of affected audiobook

sales." It said the program's 90-day window is shorter than the

1-to-3 year range that courts use to determine competitive harm

from an exclusivity arrangement.

"The complaint alleges no facts showing that Audible has

somehow hobbled Google or any other identified rival by inducing

some self-published authors to sign exclusive deals," Amazon's ( AMZN )

filing said.

Switching from exclusive to general distribution is

permanent, Reiss' lawsuit said. Reiss said Audible's policy "is

designed to prevent experimentation, innovation, and a test of

competition by discouraging authors from ever distributing on a

competitive basis."

Amazon ( AMZN ) also said it was lawful for the company to spend more

resources promoting its exclusive content than on other titles.

Reiss is seeking class-action status for thousands of

authors and rights holders.

The case is CD Reiss v. Amazon.com ( AMZN ), U.S. District Court for

the Western District of Washington, No. 2:24-cv-00851.

For plaintiff: Steve Berman of Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro

and Phillip Cramer of Sperling & Slater

For defendant: Carrie Mahan, Benjamin Mundel and Randi

Singer of Sidley Austin

Read more:

Amazon ( AMZN ) accused of audiobook monopoly in author class action

Amazon ( AMZN ) defeats US consumers' class action over Whole Foods

delivery fees

FTC lawsuit over Amazon's ( AMZN ) Prime program set for June 2025

trial

Amazon ( AMZN ) fends off US class action over 'guaranteed' delivery

window