U.S. Supreme Court to hear Apple App Store antitrust dispute
1–10 of 258 posts
Re: U.S. Supreme Court to hear Apple App Store antitrust dispute
#2> Developers “cannot risk the possibility of Apple removing them from the App Store if they bring suit,” the American Antitrust Institute advocacy group said in a brief.
To my untrained IANAL eyes, this seems to be the meat of the argument. Apple is trying to say they are just an agent facilitating a sale, all the while jingling the kingdom keys in their back pocket by controlling who gets to sell.
They are seeking to chill consumers and developers alike.
Re: U.S. Supreme Court to hear Apple App Store antitrust dispute
#3> Developers “cannot risk the possibility of Apple removing them from the App Store if they bring suit,” the American Antitrust Institute advocacy group said in a brief. To my untrained IANAL eyes, this seems to be the meat of the argument. Apple is trying to say they are just an agent facilitating a sale, all the while jingling the kingdom keys in their back pocket by controlling who gets to sell. They are seeking t…
I think this is their argument ultimately:
Apple has seized upon a 1977 Supreme Court ruling that limited damages for anti-competitive conduct to those directly overcharged instead of indirect victims who paid an overcharge passed on by others. Part of the concern, the court said in that case, was to free judges from having to make complex calculations of damages.
I'm no lawyer either but that seems to generally be true of this case in that users shouldn't be the ones bringing cases but developers could by my read. But whatever we'll see what the court decides.
Re: U.S. Supreme Court to hear Apple App Store antitrust dispute
#4I don't understand why Apple isn't getting slapped for only allowing Safari-based browsers in the App Store. I don't understand anti-trust laws that well, but didn't Microsoft settle out of a very similar case related to bundling Media Player and IE with Windows?
Re: U.S. Supreme Court to hear Apple App Store antitrust dispute
#5I don't understand why Apple isn't getting slapped for only allowing Safari-based browsers in the App Store. I don't understand anti-trust laws that well, but didn't Microsoft settle out of a very similar case related to bundling Media Player and IE with Windows?
I expect the substantial difference is that Microsoft's share of the PC market was far closer to a monopoly than Apple's share of the smartphone market is now (about 40% in the U.S.)
Re: U.S. Supreme Court to hear Apple App Store antitrust dispute
#6Isn't the premise of this case, that Apple's "monopoly" on the app store and 30% toll on developers is effectively jacking up app prices for consumers, pretty hard to support with evidence? My impression is that the modern app store coincides with (if it didn't actually cause, which is possible as well) an industry-historic decline in software prices for consumers. Things we pay $0.99 today for used to cost $50.
Re: U.S. Supreme Court to hear Apple App Store antitrust dispute
#7I don't understand why Apple isn't getting slapped for only allowing Safari-based browsers in the App Store. I don't understand anti-trust laws that well, but didn't Microsoft settle out of a very similar case related to bundling Media Player and IE with Windows?
Microsoft had a monopoly on the desktop OS market, and so pushing IE was anti-competitive. Apple isn’t anywhere near having a monopoly in phones, in the US or anywhere else.
It’s not just the behavior that’s against the law, it’s the behavior plus the market position.
Re: U.S. Supreme Court to hear Apple App Store antitrust dispute
#8I don't understand why Apple isn't getting slapped for only allowing Safari-based browsers in the App Store. I don't understand anti-trust laws that well, but didn't Microsoft settle out of a very similar case related to bundling Media Player and IE with Windows?
Chrome is available on the App Store
Re: U.S. Supreme Court to hear Apple App Store antitrust dispute
#9Here’s what I don’t get: in what sense is this a monopoly? Consumers have knowledge that the App Store is the only game in town on an iPhone, and they have the option to buy a different phone if they don’t want to use the App Store.
That’s like saying that the manufacturer of my vacuum has a monopoly on vacuum bags.
Re: U.S. Supreme Court to hear Apple App Store antitrust dispute
#10I don't understand why Apple isn't getting slapped for only allowing Safari-based browsers in the App Store. I don't understand anti-trust laws that well, but didn't Microsoft settle out of a very similar case related to bundling Media Player and IE with Windows?
I just downloaded Firefox and Chrome from App Store. Do I miss something?