It’s a textbook case, yet the hundreds of times we’ve heard this story before the lawsuit went nowhere. Perhaps reality isn’t as cut and dried as this article makes it look.
Japanese game publisher Digital Will has filed a lawsuit against Apple
11–20 of 156 posts
Re: Japanese game publisher Digital Will has filed a lawsuit against Apple
#12A sad developer treatment, and a sorry-ass state for a platform, but not related to antitrust law, much less a "textbook antitrust case". For starters, Apple is not a monopoly. You are not a monopoly on your own platform, especially if that platform doesn't even have the majority of the relevant market. A company makes a platform or product so that they dictate the terms and if it's a marketplace, what and how it acc…
> You are not a monopoly on your own platform, especially if that platform doesn't even have the majority of the relevant market. iPhone has a market share of almost 70% in Japan, the location of the plaintiff. iPhone also has a market share of over 50% now in the United States, by the way. > A company makes a platform or product so that they dictate the terms and if it's a marketplace, what and how it accepts to sel…
> Phone has a market share of almost 70% in Japan, the location of the plaintiff. iPhone also has a market share of over 50% now in the United States, by the way.
Neither one of those market shares are monopolies.
> Historical revisionism. For more than 30 years prior to iOS, general-purpose computing platforms were mostly open with no vendor-controlled store.
If you don't like the iOS platform then don't develop for it or buy iOS devices. There is an endless kaleidoscope of Android devices you can choose from.
Re: Japanese game publisher Digital Will has filed a lawsuit against Apple
#13A sad developer treatment, and a sorry-ass state for a platform, but not related to antitrust law, much less a "textbook antitrust case". For starters, Apple is not a monopoly. You are not a monopoly on your own platform, especially if that platform doesn't even have the majority of the relevant market. A company makes a platform or product so that they dictate the terms and if it's a marketplace, what and how it acc…
Anti-trust also encompasses anti-competitive behavior, such as limiting consumer choice and stifling competition. It's a bit grey since Apple's marketplace is pretty unique. We need actual litigation to bring out clear answers.
Re: Japanese game publisher Digital Will has filed a lawsuit against Apple
#14A sad developer treatment, and a sorry-ass state for a platform, but not related to antitrust law, much less a "textbook antitrust case". For starters, Apple is not a monopoly. You are not a monopoly on your own platform, especially if that platform doesn't even have the majority of the relevant market. A company makes a platform or product so that they dictate the terms and if it's a marketplace, what and how it acc…
Yeah you are right that people are applying the wrong laws and expecting results. Ideally we would consider creating new laws. But it is hard to explain why a company's control over its own platform can be harmful especially if competition exists.
IMO the reason is that both customers and small creators end up losing in this scheme. They end up purchasing/making products often not for creativity or joy, but for necessity and FOMO. And yet these products are planned obsolescence. So even if this isn't a monopoly, it is exploitative.
I'm not sure whether the US can/should make a law against exploiting customers. But people should at least talk more about this weird tech environment we are in.
Re: Japanese game publisher Digital Will has filed a lawsuit against Apple
#15Earlier quoted context omitted.
> For example, you are not a monopoly on your own platform, but working with anyone to raise the prices on another platform is illegal under this framework, as well. That's when the players the work with form a "cartel". And even there it's not an antitrust case until we're talking about a majority of combined share. Else two or more two-bit players deciding to sell at the same price is not a cartel (nor a trust). If…
I picked that example because Apple has already lost in that scenario before. :D https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Apple_Inc . There is also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_L... , so Apple hasn't exactly been free of antitrust legislation in the past...
>I picked that example because Apple has already lost in that scenario before.
It has, but it's not really relevant to the case, nor is the employee thing.
Nor I find the court decision particularly correct in that case anyway. Amazon had for over a decade (and still) applies 10000-pound coercion pressure upon the publishers from big monopoly position, yet Apple got the fines because the publishers decided to sell where they'd be allowed a higher selling price instead of the one forced upon them by Amazon's wieght.
Re: Japanese game publisher Digital Will has filed a lawsuit against Apple
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
> For example, you are not a monopoly on your own platform, but working with anyone to raise the prices on another platform is illegal under this framework, as well. That's when the players the work with form a "cartel". And even there it's not an antitrust case until we're talking about a majority of combined share. Else two or more two-bit players deciding to sell at the same price is not a cartel (nor a trust). If…
I picked that example because Apple has already lost in that scenario before. :D https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Apple_Inc . There is also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_L... , so Apple hasn't exactly been free of antitrust legislation in the past...
That's an irrelevant scenario because it involves multiple companies working in concert. This is just Apple.
I don't understand how this is any different than Sony or Nintendo deciding the terms to release games on their hardware. Is it because they charge for dev-kits and Apple doesn't.
Are we certain it's in the public's interest to make development for Apple platforms more restrictive?
Re: Japanese game publisher Digital Will has filed a lawsuit against Apple
#17Earlier quoted context omitted.
I picked that example because Apple has already lost in that scenario before. :D https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Apple_Inc . There is also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_L... , so Apple hasn't exactly been free of antitrust legislation in the past...
> I picked that example because Apple has already lost in that scenario before. It has, but it's not really relevant to the case, nor is the employee thing. Nor I find the court decision particularly correct in that case anyway. Amazon had for over a decade (and still) applies 10000-pound coercion pressure upon the publishers from big monopoly position, yet Apple got the fines because the publishers decided to sell w…
I was pointing out that your claim of monopoly is irrelevant for the question, though. You can totally be found guilty of antitrust without having or abusing a monopoly. As evidenced by Apple on multiple occasions.
If you are arguing that those decisions were wrong, good luck with that. They lost handily in both of the cited cases I picked.
Again, I'm only stating that antitrust is not completely defined by monopoly. That is just the one people think they understand the most.
Re: Japanese game publisher Digital Will has filed a lawsuit against Apple
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You are not a monopoly on your own platform, especially if that platform doesn't even have the majority of the relevant market. iPhone has a market share of almost 70% in Japan, the location of the plaintiff. iPhone also has a market share of over 50% now in the United States, by the way. > A company makes a platform or product so that they dictate the terms and if it's a marketplace, what and how it accepts to sel…
> Phone has a market share of almost 70% in Japan, the location of the plaintiff. iPhone also has a market share of over 50% now in the United States, by the way. Neither one of those market shares are monopolies. > Historical revisionism. For more than 30 years prior to iOS, general-purpose computing platforms were mostly open with no vendor-controlled store. If you don't like the iOS platform then don't develop for…
Of course it's monopolistic. What standard are you comparing to? You don't need to have 100% of the market to exert monopoly control.
Non-monopoly behavior would be users and developers having the choice to offer & install iOS apps outside of Apple's app store, but choosing the app store because the trade-off of fees is considered fair for the trust & platform convenience gained in exchange.
Re: Japanese game publisher Digital Will has filed a lawsuit against Apple
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
I picked that example because Apple has already lost in that scenario before. :D https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Apple_Inc . There is also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_L... , so Apple hasn't exactly been free of antitrust legislation in the past...
That's an irrelevant scenario because it involves multiple companies working in concert. This is just Apple. I don't understand how this is any different than Sony or Nintendo deciding the terms to release games on their hardware. Is it because they charge for dev-kits and Apple doesn't. Are we certain it's in the public's interest to make development for Apple platforms more restrictive?
It is only relevant as evidence that antitrust != monopoly laws. They include monopoly laws, of course; but there is more to them than that.
This isn't a decided case, such that I don't know what you are asking? Do we have evidence that Sony/Nintendo won't let you be a paying developer? More, do we have evidence that they would let you, but then after possibly benefiting from your efforts, kick you off their platform with no recourse?
I confess I would not be too surprised if we do have some of that evidence, but I haven't seen it. We have seen plenty of shady crap from those companies, but there are material other differences that make them hard to compare.
Re: Japanese game publisher Digital Will has filed a lawsuit against Apple
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You are not a monopoly on your own platform, especially if that platform doesn't even have the majority of the relevant market. iPhone has a market share of almost 70% in Japan, the location of the plaintiff. iPhone also has a market share of over 50% now in the United States, by the way. > A company makes a platform or product so that they dictate the terms and if it's a marketplace, what and how it accepts to sel…
> Phone has a market share of almost 70% in Japan, the location of the plaintiff. iPhone also has a market share of over 50% now in the United States, by the way. Neither one of those market shares are monopolies. > Historical revisionism. For more than 30 years prior to iOS, general-purpose computing platforms were mostly open with no vendor-controlled store. If you don't like the iOS platform then don't develop for…
One can like the iOS platform and still advocate for general-purpose computing. I don't understand why folks on Hacker News, of all places, defend walled gardens so vehemently.