Apple Asks Judge to Dismiss App Store Monopoly Lawsuit

[BaldiMac]

The key word is business justification. Does the appstore no longer function if there's another store that also sells iOS apps? Sure that other store might become more popular and put the appstore out of business, but that's business. There is no justification why other companies aren't allowed to start their own iOS store.

Sure there is. Security, stability, network management, etc.

So, is cydia (and its apps/tweaks) legal or what then?

That's a two part question. My understanding is that jailbreaking and Cydia are both legal for the installation of legal and compatible apps on smartphones. (There is no exemption to the DMCA for tablets.)

My opinion based on copyright law is that most apps and tweaks on Cydia don't meet this requirement as they require modifications to iOS to provide unsupported features. But an App Store app distributed by its developer through Cydia would seem to be legal.

 

[eleven59]

I am suing Microsoft next week... I should be able to play non licensed games, maybe even playstation games on my 360...

BINGO

how is this any different from any other "system"... can you use android apps on windows mobile? or vice versa? do those wii games play on a 360, or a ps3, vice versa... damn i cant buy ford parts for my chevy... such and such software is windows only... and on and on and on

sounds like a witch hunt

 

[davelanger]

[url=http://cdn.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogodarkd.png]Image[/url]

Image​

Apple has asked a federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit alleging that Apple has an illegal monopoly because the iPhone does not allow users to use alternative app stores by default, reports Bloomberg.
The plaintiffs argue that because a consumer can't buy Angry Birds for the iPhone from an alternative app store, Apple has an illegal monopoly and is reducing consumer choice.

This isn't the first time Apple has been accused of running an illegal monopoly. The iTunes Store and iBookstore have previously been the subject of lawsuits. This lawsuit was originally filed in 2011, in the U.S. District Court, Northern District of California (Oakland).

Article Link: Apple Asks Judge to Dismiss App Store Monopoly Lawsuit

Wouldnt this be like microsoft using sony because sony doesnt let people use xbox live and buy games off of the xbox live store?

----------

Did you even read the article? They're being investigated for the way you can get the apps, You can only get them from a single App Store, Apples App Store. There's nowhere else to turn to for apps.

If you want to buy PS3 games or Xbox 360 games you can go to a number of different stores, dozens and dozens, or order them online, or download them. Your comparisons are hillarious. Are Apple being investigated for not being able to run Android apps on the iPhone? No.

Thanks for playing.

If you want to buy an xbox live arcade game, you can only get it on xbox live, there is no other store to buy them at.

 

[matttye]

The lawsuit makes sense to me. Customers end up paying more because of Apple's refusal to allow users to install apps in any other way than their own App Store and they charge developers 30%, which is then passed onto customers.

If that isn't a monopoly I don't know what is!

Good luck with the suit

 

[davelanger]

Maybe you missed this the several other times it was explained in the thread.

This isn't about licensed or unlicensed games.

If you are to run an app on the iPhone or iPad - there is only ONE store to get it.

If you want a PS3 game - you can buy it online at many etailers and/or in dozens of stores like target and walmart.

Understand the fundamental difference?

Bringing it back to apple.

A licensed "lightening" accessory has to be approved by Apple - but you don't HAVE to buy it at the Apple store. You can buy these accessories anywhere you want.

Android competes with apple, so why should someone with an apple product be able to buy something off the android app store?

 

[matttye]

Huh. I figured it had a legal basis.

The legal basis is very clearly stated here:

"Attorneys who filed the suit in 2011 claim that a monopoly exists because an iPhone user who doesn't want to pay what developers charge for applications available through Apple's App Store can't go anywhere else to buy them. Apple requires iPhone software developers to turn over 30 percent of what they charge for an application, increasing prices and excluding competitors from the iPhone "aftermarket" of applications, they claim."

 

[samcraig]

Android competes with apple, so why should someone with an apple product be able to buy something off the android app store?

What the what?

That's not what I was saying or what's being suggested at all.

No one is saying you should be able to buy iOS apps on Google Play

 

[BaldiMac]

The legal basis is very clearly stated here:

"Attorneys who filed the suit in 2011 claim that a monopoly exists because an iPhone user who doesn't want to pay what developers charge for applications available through Apple's App Store can't go anywhere else to buy them. Apple requires iPhone software developers to turn over 30 percent of what they charge for an application, increasing prices and excluding competitors from the iPhone "aftermarket" of applications, they claim."

I'm aware. I was just making a joke based on the fact that the poster claimed the basis of the suit was that consumers simply didn't get what they wanted.

 

[matttye]

I'm aware. I was just making a joke based on the fact that the poster claimed the basis of the suit was that consumers simply didn't get what they wanted.

Aha okay, I must admit I didn't read what you quoted!

 

[gotluck]

That's a two part question. My understanding is that jailbreaking and Cydia are both legal for the installation of legal and compatible apps on smartphones. (There is no exemption to the DMCA for tablets.)

My opinion based on copyright law is that most apps and tweaks on Cydia don't meet this requirement as they require modifications to iOS to provide unsupported features. But an App Store app distributed by its developer through Cydia would seem to be legal.

So then a good majority of the apps (require root / modify iOS) available on cydia are likely illegal and are just left alone even though they are generating revenue..

I don't understand why editing or altering the OS should violate copyright law to begin with. I'll skip my poor analogies, but if this logic was applied to other aspects of life - it would suck.

 

[davelanger]

So then a good majority of the apps (require root / modify iOS) available on cydia are likely illegal and are just left alone even though they are generating revenue..

I don't understand why editing or altering the OS should violate copyright law to begin with. I'll skip my poor analogies, but if this logic was applied to other aspects of life - it would suck.

There is a reason why IOS has no maleware and android and other smart phones have it. If apple ever opened up to other appstores the phone would be riddled with virus's and it would run like crap.

 

[samcraig]

There is a reason why IOS has no maleware and android and other smart phones have it. If apple ever opened up to other appstores the phone would be riddled with virus's and it would run like crap.

You're assuming that any other appstore would be selling apps not certified by Apple. Which wouldn't necc be the case.

 

[BaldiMac]

You're assuming that any other appstore would be selling apps not certified by Apple. Which wouldn't necc be the case.

Of course, Apple would charge 30% for certifying the app.

 

[Renzatic]

I don't understand why editing or altering the OS should violate copyright law to begin with. I'll skip my poor analogies, but if this logic was applied to other aspects of life - it would suck.

It depends on what you're editing and altering. If you're talking about going in and reverse engineering source code to hack at the core of the non-open sourced bits of iOS, or taking Apple's copyrighted materials like their icons and whatnot to distribute them in other packages, then yeah, that's illegal.

If you're talking about program tweaks like SBSettings or Switchy? Those are fine. They're just third party programs running inside of iOS, much like any app. It's no different than downloading a new color scheme or installing Cinch in OSX. The only reason you don't have stuff like that on the official App Store is because Apple doesn't like any apps that could potentially compromise performance or battery life.

 

[BaldiMac]

It depends on what you're editing and altering. If you're talking about going in and reverse engineering source code to hack at the core of the non-open sourced bits of iOS, or taking Apple's copyrighted materials like their icons and whatnot to distribute them in other packages, then yeah, that's illegal.

If you're talking about program tweaks like SBSettings or Switchy? Those are fine. They're just third party programs running inside of iOS, much like any app. It's no different than downloading a new color scheme or installing Cinch in OSX. The only reason you don't have stuff like that on the official App Store is because Apple doesn't like any apps that could potentially compromise performance or battery life.

I don't agree. Themes and apps like SBSettings modify iOS to provide additional functionality. That is not permitted by copyright law. Whether anyone cares or not is a different question.

 

[Renzatic]

I don't agree. Themes and apps like SBSettings modify iOS to provide additional functionality. That is not permitted by copyright law. Whether anyone cares or not is a different question.

eeeehhhrrrr, I'm not so sure about that. It's against Apple's T&S, but don't think it's breaking any copyright laws since it's only adding functionality on top of the OS, using the already existing APIs to do so. There's no circumventing or hacking of anything (besides having to jailbreak your phone to get access to it, but that's a whole other complicated kettle of fish).

 

[ncaissie]

Maybe that would matter if apps in the App Store were expensive like console games but when someone is buying an app for $0.99 or $1.99 are they really going to care if they can get it 15% cheaper somewhere else? Most of the apps on my phone cost me nothing so why would I go anywhere other than the App Store to get them?

$1.99 and $.99 apps are mostly crap. Anything worth play are $5 and now getting higher and higher. Companies like EA are charging more and more.

 

[lordofthereef]

There is a reason why IOS has no maleware and android and other smart phones have it. If apple ever opened up to other appstores the phone would be riddled with virus's and it would run like crap.

While you do have something here, I believe you have blown things way out of proportion.

First, is OSX riddled with viruses and running like crap? No, yet it has always been open to the public 100%. There is a huge thing to consider though. Apple puts a lot of effort into keeping OSX safe, perhaps (I say perhaps because there is no way I can be certain) more work than they need to put into iOS. Look how quickly Java got blocked and patched. Apple did an awesome job with that, but that's something they don't have to worry about with iOS (to the same degree).

It's also pretty simple to, out of the box, require multiple additional steps for the end user to take to be able to install third party software not sold on the AppStore. Those "other" os's already do this. Those people who don't know what they are doing can still easily download "sanctioned" apps from official sources.

The fact of the matter is that Apple has spoon fed us this belief that the OS cannot be secure unless all software installations go directly through Apple first. There are plenty who are willing to accept that. Those who are not are the ones currently fighting Apple. The question is, has Apple over asserted their power?

----------

$1.99 and $.99 apps are mostly crap. Anything worth play are $5 and now getting higher and higher. Companies like EA are charging more and more.

We are at an interesting time. Smartphone games are eating into handheld, and maybe even console games, market share. Bigger game developers are therefore starting to developer their big games for these smartphones too. Still, if you look at the most profitable games, they are almost always those that sell for just a couple of bucks. It all depends on the sales model and target audience. Often time a dev can make more money just off ofnthensheer volume of apps sold than they could asking much more per license.

 

[Death-T]

The law suit is pretty frivolous and I wouldn't want to see Apple lose too much money over it... On the other hand, it would be cool if they were forced to give in to this and allow third party app stores. That'd pave the way for video game emulators without having to jail break among other things.

 

[Brother Esau]

$1.99 and $.99 apps are mostly crap. Anything worth play are $5 and now getting higher and higher. Companies like EA are charging more and more.

That's because E.A Games has the ethics of a steaming pile of dog sh**t and they don't care about you only your money. They will gouge you for as much as they can get just like Apple will.

APPLE is like the U.S Government they don't like or want competition!

As far as I am concerned Apple most certainly is indeed running a monopoly and need to be shut down for it.

Apple folks talk crap about Windows but I am sorry guys, I started out on APPLE in 1982 and Apple is far more proprietary than Micr$oft has ever been. Not like microsoft is some saving grace here but lets be fair and call a spade a spade.

 

[davelanger]

While you do have something here, I believe you have blown things way out of proportion.

First, is OSX riddled with viruses and running like crap? No, yet it has always been open to the public 100%. There is a huge thing to consider though. Apple puts a lot of effort into keeping OSX safe, perhaps (I say perhaps because there is no way I can be certain) more work than they need to put into iOS. Look how quickly Java got blocked and patched. Apple did an awesome job with that, but that's something they don't have to worry about with iOS (to the same degree).

It's also pretty simple to, out of the box, require multiple additional steps for the end user to take to be able to install third party software not sold on the AppStore. Those "other" os's already do this. Those people who don't know what they are doing can still easily download "sanctioned" apps from official sources.

The fact of the matter is that Apple has spoon fed us this belief that the OS cannot be secure unless all software installations go directly through Apple first. There are plenty who are willing to accept that. Those who are not are the ones currently fighting Apple. The question is, has Apple over asserted their power?

----------



We are at an interesting time. Smartphone games are eating into handheld, and maybe even console games, market share. Bigger game developers are therefore starting to developer their big games for these smartphones too. Still, if you look at the most profitable games, they are almost always those that sell for just a couple of bucks. It all depends on the sales model and target audience. Often time a dev can make more money just off ofnthensheer volume of apps sold than they could asking much more per license.

If people want to use other app stores apps just buy that android phone then. Also, lets say apple is force to allow the use of 3rd party app stores, does that mean apple will ask to open up their store and have apple products on the android phones?

Will that also mean that apple can ask for a cut of profits for 3rd party store apps that are buying apps for the iphone?

Another question, if you have a nook can you buy books on the kindle store?

 

[samcraig]

If people want to use other app stores apps just buy that android phone then. Also, lets say apple is force to allow the use of 3rd party app stores, does that mean apple will ask to open up their store and have apple products on the android phones?

Will that also mean that apple can ask for a cut of profits for 3rd party store apps that are buying apps for the iphone?

Another question, if you have a nook can you buy books on the kindle store?

I have no idea what I bolded means. Can you explain?

Second - on the store - probably not. But they can collect their $99 fee from developers to be in the program. And they might also be able to charge something to get "apple certified"

Third - you can buy books for the Nook at several places. The Nook reads different formats - not just B&N's proprietary format. Not only that - B&N (and Amazon) make apps that are available on iOS and Android. So the hardware/software "monopoly" doesn't exist.

 

[davelanger]

I have no idea what I bolded means. Can you explain?

Second - on the store - probably not. But they can collect their $99 fee from developers to be in the program. And they might also be able to charge something to get "apple certified"

Third - you can buy books for the Nook at several places. The Nook reads different formats - not just B&N's proprietary format. Not only that - B&N (and Amazon) make apps that are available on iOS and Android. So the hardware/software "monopoly" doesn't exist.

what I mean is, since lawyers are suing to have iphone users use other app stores, does that mean that apple can turn around and say that android users must be able to use the apple store to buy their apps.

 

[Oletros]

what I mean is, since lawyers are suing to have iphone users use other app stores, does that mean that apple can turn around and say that android users must be able to use the apple store to buy their apps.

Mmm, no?

 

[gotluck]

There is a reason why IOS has no maleware and android and other smart phones have it. If apple ever opened up to other appstores the phone would be riddled with virus's and it would run like crap.

As its been said before, I would consider OSX 'open' and it is quite secure.