1. Hachette did not negotiate in good faith before the end of the contract.

They didn’t negotiate at all. Amazon and Hachette agree on this crucial point. The first Hachette offer was in April. Amazon says the original contract ran out in March and Hachette hasn’t denied it. In my view, the party that makes no attempt to negotiate during the term of the original contract is the instigator of the stand-off.

2. Hachette knew for months that their authors were being harmed and they did nothing.

Sullivan noticed that the usual Amazon discounts on his titles were gone on February 7. He saw the inventory issues on March 9. He let Hachette know about both issues. At that point Hachette had let their contract expire without so much as a counter-offer.

Read that again.

“Amazon says the original contract ran out in March…”

“Sullivan noticed that the usual Amazon discounts on his titles were gone on February 7. He saw the inventory issues on March 9.”

“Hachette did not negotiate in good faith before the end of the contract.”

Neither, apparently, did Amazon, if they felt happy to start playing hardball a month or more before the end of their existing contract. (Blah blah blah, confirmation bias, Stockholm Syndrome, etc. etc.) (linkage)