> How can something be anti-competitive if it increased competition? Whether prices went up or down is irrelevant. The whole point of anti-trust law is to make sure that the market has competition. Not to make sure that prices are low.

You're conflating all of the different markets here. There is the publisher and retailer and the retailer and the consumer. The latter now no longer exists, as the publisher chooses the price for both markets.

That the ereader market, a third market in this equation, is now more competitive (which is a debatable subject) isn't relevant, as you can't use anti-competitive measures in one market to increase competition in another.