The problem I see with all of this is that the public seems to think that pricing is driven by how much it costs to make something.
Sometimes pricing is driven by production costs. If I can figure out a way to make a competing product for a lower cost, I may be able to undercut the other guy's price and draw away sales. This isn't totally applicable to ebooks, though, because they aren't truly fungible. Due to copyright laws and licensing agreements, no one is going to be able to produce a lower priced copy of, say, the Typhon Pact novels.
On the other hand, if someone produces cheaper sci-fi adventure fiction, that could, possibly, start to draw readers away from
Trek fiction generally.
After that it's all about what people are willing to pay for it.
But, if the public really believes that ebooks are cheaper to produce, they may not be willing to pay the same amount for an ebook as for a physical book. So, indirectly, the perceived cost to produce an ebook may impact the price.
So, the publishing industry hasn't told any lies, haven't schemed anybody, they've been doing business the exact same way literally every other business operates (at least any that actually remain in business).
I'm not sure that it's fair to say that "literally every . . . business" charges the maximum amount for its product that it believes people are willing to pay. Like I said before, competition can drive down prices, and competition paired with increased efficiencies can keep lower prices sustainable.
There's also the question of what "what people are willing to pay" means. Lets suppose that I can sell 100 widgets at $10 each and make $5 profit per widget, or I can sell 200 widgets at $9 each and make $4 profit per widget. Apparently "people are are willing to pay" $10, but
more people seem to be willing to pay $9.
So, yeah, pricing is more complex than just "mark it up by X% and move on," but it's also more complex than just "squeeze every penny you can get out of the buyer."