Supreme Court rules antitrust lawsuit against Apple can proceed
1–10 of 357 posts
Re: Supreme Court rules antitrust lawsuit against Apple can proceed
#2Wow! 5-4 decision, but overall a big win for the consumer. Apple’s legal team is having a really rough year
Re: Supreme Court rules antitrust lawsuit against Apple can proceed
#3For those confused like me: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc._v._Pepper
> Apple filed a petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court in August 2017, posing the question "whether consumers may sue anyone who delivers goods to them for antitrust damages, even when they seek damages based on prices set by third parties who would be the immediate victims of the alleged offense". The Court agreed to hear the case in June 2018.[8] Oral arguments were held on November 26.[9] [10] Court observers stated that the four liberal Justices were joined by three of the conservative ones, Justices Alito, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh, as to side with consumers on the question of standing.[11] Justice Sonia Sotomayor stated that Apple's practice creates a closed loop that impacts the price paid by consumers.[12] Justice Neil Gorsuch considered that the prior decision from Illinois Brick may need to be overturned at the federal level, as at least 30 states have rejected the Illinois Brick doctrine.[12]
> The Court issued its 5-4 decision on May 13, 2019, affirming the Ninth Circuit's decision that consumers did have standing under Illinois Brick to sue Apple for antitrust practices. Justice Bret Kavanaugh, writing for the majority, stated that under the test of Illinois Brick, consumers were directly affected by Apple's fee and were not secondary purchasers, that consumers could sue Apple directly since it was Apple's fee that affected the prices of the apps, and that while the structure for any damages that consumers may win in the continuing suit may be complicated, this is not a factor to determine the standing of the suit. Kavanaugh was joined by Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan. The decision remanded the class-action case to continue in lower courts, though did not rule on any of the antitrust factors otherwise at the center of the case.
Re: Supreme Court rules antitrust lawsuit against Apple can proceed
#4For those who don't want to read the opinion:
SCOTUS holds that Apple can be sued for alleged monopoly of the Apple App Store. It does not decide whether or not this alleged monopoly exist.
Interestingly, it's a 5-4 decision, with Kavanaugh writing the decision, joined by the 4 liberal justices. Probably the most unexpected alignment of the current term!
Re: Supreme Court rules antitrust lawsuit against Apple can proceed
#5Am I reading correctly that this argument has now been going on for 8 years, or at minimum nearly 6? [1] An argument about who I am buying from when I type my credit card into Apple's system, click a purchase button on an Apple device, and then use the results of that purchase solely on Apple devices?
Re: Supreme Court rules antitrust lawsuit against Apple can proceed
#6Essentially, the Supreme Court is letting an antitrust lawsuit against Apple proceed — and it has rejected Apple’s argument that iOS App Store users aren’t really its customers.
Re: Supreme Court rules antitrust lawsuit against Apple can proceed
#7Another article for more context.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2018/11/26/iphone-...
> iPhone users can sue Apple over “monopolistic” prices in the iOS App Store, prices that a group of consumers allege are driven higher by the commissions Apple charges independent appmakers.
Re: Supreme Court rules antitrust lawsuit against Apple can proceed
#8delete
Re: Supreme Court rules antitrust lawsuit against Apple can proceed
#9Question: How can Apple have a monopoly if a customer can decide to buy a competitor's phone to use as they please (Android, etc). That's where I get lost. The Windows/Netscape made sense since the claim was that Windows dominated the market almost completely (around 90% on those times?). Can I sue any other hardware device company (smart fridges, smart tvs, rokus) for monopoly since I can't load my own apps on them? Anyways, having an alternate app store on iOS sounds good to me.
Re: Supreme Court rules antitrust lawsuit against Apple can proceed
#10I wrote comments on this case here in the past, and not gonna rewrite them, so here is the TL;DR:
This was not unexpected but precedent was on Apple's side.
Apple was basically playing the "whoa, we don't sell apps, we just make an app store. They buy apps from the developers" card.
This is technically true.
In that situation, Illinois Brick/etc would normally say consumers cannot sue you, only app developers can. Most of the reasoning in those decisions is around how hard it is to calculate damages, etc.
However, the court refused to buy it.
The abstract they give is pretty easy to understand: "Second, Apple’s theory is not persuasive economically or legally. It would draw an arbitrary and unprincipled line among retailers based on their financial arrangements with their manufacturers or suppliers. And it would permit a consumer to sue a monopolistic retailer when the retailer set the retail price by marking up the price it had paid the manufacturer or supplier for the good or service but not when the manufacturer or supplier set the retail price and the retailer took a commission on each sale.
Third, Apple’s theory would provide a roadmap for monopolistic retailers to structure transactions with manufacturers or suppliers so as to evade antitrust claims by consumers and thereby thwart effective antitrust enforcement. "