Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Japanese game publisher Digital Will has filed a lawsuit against Apple

patentlyapple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 156 posts

Re: Japanese game publisher Digital Will has filed a lawsuit against Apple

#131

Post by Apocryphon »

scarface_74 wrote: post #127
Apocryphon wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What was the ruling by the other judge, and was it brought up in Epic Games v. Apple

Why does it matter? One case was about collusion between Apple and the book publishers and the other was about whether Apple had a monopoly on the App Store. Why would the judge care about the other case? What precedence did the first cass set on the other?

To answer the question: "So did the Epic judge ignore the ruling of another judge where Apple was accused of behaving monopolistic in regards to the App Store?"

If the judge didn't care about the other case, then they are plainly ignoring the ruling of the other judge, thus substantiating my assertion that "Judges are actively ignoring each other’s rulings these days, what matters is the newest case that will ensue"

Re: Japanese game publisher Digital Will has filed a lawsuit against Apple

#132

Post by scarface_74 »

Apocryphon wrote: post #131
scarface_74 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does it matter? One case was about collusion between Apple and the book publishers and the other was about whether Apple had a monopoly on the App Store. Why would the judge care about the other case? What precedence did the first cass set on the other?

To answer the question: "So did the Epic judge ignore the ruling of another judge where Apple was accused of behaving monopolistic in regards to the App Store?" If the judge didn't care about the other case, then they are plainly ignoring the ruling of the other judge, thus substantiating my assertion that "Judges are actively ignoring each other’s rulings these days, what matters is the newest case that will ensue"

Really? So are you saying that the judge in the Epic case about the App Store should have taken into account a completely unrelated case just because it involved Apple? To what end?

Re: Japanese game publisher Digital Will has filed a lawsuit against Apple

#133

Post by Apocryphon »

scarface_74 wrote: post #132
Apocryphon wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To answer the question: "So did the Epic judge ignore the ruling of another judge where Apple was accused of behaving monopolistic in regards to the App Store?" If the judge didn't care about the other case, then they are plainly ignoring the ruling of the other judge, thus substantiating my assertion that "Judges are actively ignoring each other’s rulings these days, what matters is the newest case that will ensue"

Really? So are you saying that the judge in the Epic case about the App Store should have taken into account a completely unrelated case just because it involved Apple? To what end?

Sounds like the answer to "So did the Epic judge ignore the ruling of another judge where Apple was accused of behaving monopolistic in regards to the App Store?" is a NO, then.

Re: Japanese game publisher Digital Will has filed a lawsuit against Apple

#134

Post by scarface_74 »

Apocryphon wrote: post #133
scarface_74 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? So are you saying that the judge in the Epic case about the App Store should have taken into account a completely unrelated case just because it involved Apple? To what end?

Sounds like the answer to "So did the Epic judge ignore the ruling of another judge where Apple was accused of behaving monopolistic in regards to the App Store?" is a NO, then.

You still don’t get it. Apple in no way shape or form had a monopoly on ebooks in 2013.

There is a huge difference between monopolistic practices and collusion. You and I could have two competing taco stands in Nebraska and if we colluded to fix prices that would be illegal collusion even though it isn’t monopolistic.

This is why HN users make bad keyboard lawyers.

Re: Japanese game publisher Digital Will has filed a lawsuit against Apple

#135

Post by scarface_74 »

taeric wrote: post #50
scarface_74 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well seeing that no one said that Apple is colluding with anyone, what is the point?

That antitrust != monopoly. That is it. Do I also need to add that antitrust != collusion? I am not even really arguing that they are guilty in this case. I flat out don't know. I do find it odd to see the unwavering defense of Apple in this.

No one is defending Apple. I’m pushing back against the silliness of the armchair lawyers on HN that say Apple must be a monopolist even though a real judge in the Epic vs Apple case said otherwise.

Re: Japanese game publisher Digital Will has filed a lawsuit against Apple

#136

Post by coldtea »

hgs3 wrote: post #51
scarface_74 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not about me being right, it’s about what a real judge says.

Let's say the Judge* is right and Apple is not a monopoly under current antitrust laws, then all that proves is the laws are too lax.

Or it might prove that the current antitrust laws correctly deal with trusts.

And that if we want new laws, to be e.g. about "each platform must be open to third parties" regardless of market share, we need to push for them and get them, not abuse antitrust laws for something they weren't meant to cover.

Re: Japanese game publisher Digital Will has filed a lawsuit against Apple

#137

Post by coldtea »

bfdm wrote: post #18
stalfosknight wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

>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

No, but control of your own platform is not considered a monopoly if you don't have a monopoly on the overall market.

Re: Japanese game publisher Digital Will has filed a lawsuit against Apple

#138

Post by Apocryphon »

scarface_74 wrote: post #134
Apocryphon wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like the answer to "So did the Epic judge ignore the ruling of another judge where Apple was accused of behaving monopolistic in regards to the App Store?" is a NO, then.

You still don’t get it. Apple in no way shape or form had a monopoly on ebooks in 2013. There is a huge difference between monopolistic practices and collusion. You and I could have two competing taco stands in Nebraska and if we colluded to fix prices that would be illegal collusion even though it isn’t monopolistic. This is why HN users make bad keyboard lawyers.

So what other ruling did the Epic judge not ignore or ignore? I don’t care about Apple being a monopoly or not in the context of this conversation. I am trying to establish judges ignoring precedence.

Re: Japanese game publisher Digital Will has filed a lawsuit against Apple

#139

Post by taeric »

scarface_74 wrote: post #135
taeric wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That antitrust != monopoly. That is it. Do I also need to add that antitrust != collusion? I am not even really arguing that they are guilty in this case. I flat out don't know. I do find it odd to see the unwavering defense of Apple in this.

No one is defending Apple. I’m pushing back against the silliness of the armchair lawyers on HN that say Apple must be a monopolist even though a real judge in the Epic vs Apple case said otherwise.

I'll grant that is probably more valid for a larger portion of the discourse here than I realize. Doesn't feel relevant to my points, though.

Re: Japanese game publisher Digital Will has filed a lawsuit against Apple

#140

Post by scarface_74 »

Apocryphon wrote: post #138
scarface_74 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You still don’t get it. Apple in no way shape or form had a monopoly on ebooks in 2013. There is a huge difference between monopolistic practices and collusion. You and I could have two competing taco stands in Nebraska and if we colluded to fix prices that would be illegal collusion even though it isn’t monopolistic. This is why HN users make bad keyboard lawyers.

So what other ruling did the Epic judge not ignore or ignore? I don’t care about Apple being a monopoly or not in the context of this conversation. I am trying to establish judges ignoring precedence.

What other ruling did the Epic judge ignore? She ignored the trial of the person who kidnapped Lindbergh’s baby, the OJ trial and literally millions of other cases that had nothing to do with whether Apple had a monopoly on the App Store.

Even if there had been trial in a different district than where she SSD working and it didn’t make it the Supreme Court, there is no “precedence” to ignore.

Post reply on HN