Amazon Wanted to Sell New E-Books for $9

Amazon wanted to sell new e-books for $9.99. The book publishers were not happy with that idea, so the six largest publishers met with Apple, which agreed to price the books at $14.99 and $19.99. The publishers refused to work with Amazon. Apple was convicted of a conspiracy to raise e-book prices in violation of the Sherman Act. The appeals court held that Apple:

A) ​conspired to raise e-book prices but the market was not impacted so there were no damages.
B) ​conspired to raise e-book prices and was liable under a rule of reason analysis.
C) ​was not liable as the six publishers brought the idea to Apple, so the publishers were liable.
D) ​was not liable because there was no evidence that its plans ever took effect or impacted the market.
E) ​none of the other choices are correct.