Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Asks Judge to Dismiss App Store Monopoly Lawsuit
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I still hold that iOS devices are general computing devices, just like PC's.
They are not game consoles either (not saying you said they were).
OK, here's your definition. Tell me, exactly where Apple has a monopoly that satisfies this definition.
A monopoly exists when a specific person or enterprise is the only supplier of a particular commodity. [1] Monopolies are thus characterized by a lack of economic competition to produce the good or service and a lack of viable substitute goods.[2] The verb "monopolize" refers to the process by which a company gains the ability to raise prices or exclude competitors. In economics, a monopoly is a single seller. In law, a monopoly is a business entity that has significant market power, that is, the power, to charge high prices.
Apple is not the only supplier of smart phones that run apps. Apple does not produce anything that can't be bought from a competitor. Apple does not exclude competitors from offering an alternative smart phone ecosystem.
Apple doesn't just sell iPhones and iPads. They sell the whole ecosystem. Consumers are free to buy into that ecosystem, or any others that they want.
Consumers in the App store do have a choice of product. Their choice, however, exists before they decide to buy into the Apple iOS ecosystem. Apple made it clear before someone purchased their iPhone that Apps were only available via the App store. There was never a contract, stated or implied that Apple might, at some point in the future allow downloads of Apps via other means.
Further, the fact that there are over 750,000 apps on the App store, sold by a multitude of independent developers in no way limits someone's choices.
Microsoft was leveraging their os monopoly to force people to use ie. if 90% of all phones sold were apple products it might be a valid comparison. Pushing ie was not the problem. Doing it as a monopoly was. That is not the case here.
You didn't read the article or any of the comments did you? Because you'd made the same comparisons everyone has made.
Your K Cup argument would only be a valid comparison if they were made by tens of thousands of manufacturers, but are only allowed to sell through a single retailer?
Microsoft wasn't forcing people to use IE, you could easily install another browser and set it as default, what they got in trouble for was strong-arming OEMs into not including rival browsers onto their installs.
Monopolies have to be measured by degrees, though. If your focus is too narrow, everything is a monopoly. For instance: should Apple/BestBuy be sued because Apple has a deal to get a specific area of the BB sales floor that is Apple products only? That's too narrow a focus, of course not. Should Coke be forced to allow Pepsico to make Pepsi inside Coke factories? Ridiculous, way too narrow.
I'm not sure whether the AppStore is legally a large enough concept/entity to have antitrust/monopoly issues. Is "iOS store" a large enough focus? Or is it the cell phone industry? Is it the app industry, which would encompass OSX and Windows apps too? I guess the courts will figure that out. The fact that the AppStore has more apps available than all other appstores combined is a problem for calling this a monopoly, there's plenty of choice there.
I didn't really understand the difference between the app store monopoly and, say, OSX not being available on computers other than Apple's. But this has made that a lot clearer - thanks for posting.
Apple charges 3% for payment provider. Then 7% for web services. The 10% to keep crapware out of the store. 1% for profits. 5% for overhead. The rest to defend against frivolous law suits such as the one mention in the article.
Fair you think?
The whole issue is that I CANNOT put my OWN software on the phone.
Let someone else write a new OS for iphone, let someone else port android to iPhone.
You CANNOT do that because of the iron grip apple maintains on hardware that YOU OWN.
I looked it up... but all I could find was some nonsense about an iron, cannon, thimble, ship, shoe, and top hat.
What's nice about all this is that :
1. The court is going to have to determine if Apple is Monopolistic
2. I certainly want to see what will happen if Apple loses this (i doubt it since they pay an army of lobbyists to prevent exactly this kind of lawsuit)
3. A lot of people (Fanboys) here are prepared to defend Apple even if monopolistic practices are BAD for them.
1. The court is going to have to determine if Apple is Monopolistic
2. I certainly want to see what will happen if Apple loses this (i doubt it since they pay an army of lobbyists to prevent exactly this kind of lawsuit)
3. A lot of people (Fanboys) here are prepared to defend Apple even if monopolistic practices are BAD for them.
mo·nop·o·ly
/məˈnäpəlē/Noun
1.The exclusive possession or control of the supply or trade in a commodity or service.
For apple to have a monopoly on app distribution, they would have to be the ONLY app store in existence.. NOT the only app store on the iPhone.. That would indicate that the iPhone is the only option for an app enabled device, which obviously it is not..
The only reason this is being discussed, is becuase someone that doesn't have billions of dollars, has decided to go after someone that has billions of dollars.
/məˈnäpəlē/Noun
1.The exclusive possession or control of the supply or trade in a commodity or service.
For apple to have a monopoly on app distribution, they would have to be the ONLY app store in existence.. NOT the only app store on the iPhone.. That would indicate that the iPhone is the only option for an app enabled device, which obviously it is not..
The only reason this is being discussed, is becuase someone that doesn't have billions of dollars, has decided to go after someone that has billions of dollars.
Don't developers have more than one choice? I mean the web is a platform too to make their applications. And doesn't Apple support web apps? Haha. I mean this is ridiculous.
Like someone else said, why can't I play unlicensed PS3 games on my PS3?
People are silly. I mean we aren't a nation of innovators anymore. We just sue sue. :/ I mean we hold the vast majority of lawsuits that happen in the world.
Like someone else said, why can't I play unlicensed PS3 games on my PS3?
People are silly. I mean we aren't a nation of innovators anymore. We just sue sue. :/ I mean we hold the vast majority of lawsuits that happen in the world.
Good case, I hope they win.
If someone else wants to make an app store for the iphone they should be able to, just like how cydia does.
If someone else wants to make an app store for the iphone they should be able to, just like how cydia does.
Because Microsoft broke the terms of their settlement with the EU. Completely different situation.
----------
I don't think that's the word you are looking for.
Apple pays a fraction of what other large companies pay for lobbying.
http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?id=D000021754
Apple paid $2 million in 2012. Compared to $20 million by Google.
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.
This is great, about time too, just imagine if we had another option for getting apps on the iphone vs going through apple for everything? We would have more access to user developed apps and probably better tie in's into the OS itself.
To think I might be able to have a real alternative browser on an iPhone, that would be amazing! not some simple shell over webkit! Better yet Apple wouldn't be a crazy 30% take on everything! Helping developers keep money in pocket and out of Apples greedy hands. Not to mention how apple forces everything to go through their system for in app purchases, which is the worst invention in the world! in app purchases should die in a fire!
Hope the lawsuit continues!!
To think I might be able to have a real alternative browser on an iPhone, that would be amazing! not some simple shell over webkit! Better yet Apple wouldn't be a crazy 30% take on everything! Helping developers keep money in pocket and out of Apples greedy hands. Not to mention how apple forces everything to go through their system for in app purchases, which is the worst invention in the world! in app purchases should die in a fire!
Hope the lawsuit continues!!