Apple Fails in Bid to Dismiss Cydia Creator's Amended Antitrust Lawsuit

[BootsWalking]

I do not understand the reference. How does Apple's app store for the iPhone - one of many mobile phone product lines - restrain trade? Arguably it enhances trade for small developers who otherwise wouldn't have a platform to advertise their apps.

By eliminating competition for alternative forms of distribution. The fact that Apple's distribution monopoly may benefit one group doesn't mean it's not harming other groups and competition overall. The FTC evaluates the overall impact to the market when deciding which antitrust cases to prosecute.

I wonder how many people here arguing for opening the gates of sideloading have skin in the game because they work for large app developers.

I can't speak for others but I don't work for a large app developer.

 

[webkit]

Apple allows anyone to sell software in their “store”. What some competitors like Cydia are trying to achieve, is put their own store into a competitor’s infrastructure. This is similar to Home Depot being required to let Lowes have space in the Home Depot structure to sell goods at undercutting prices.

It's not similar as neither Home Depot nor Lowe's have a monopoly in the home improvement retail/store market.

 

[BootsWalking]

Apple spends all this time and effort to make the iPhone experience as good as it is, and a court is going to tell them they can't. Wow...

Microsoft spent all its time and effort to make Windows what it was and court did tell them what they can't do. Same thing with AT&T and Standard Oil.

Btw, did you argue for Microsoft's position when the government sued them?

What's next? Suing GM because the same base vehicle from one 'brand' to another doesn't support the same features? I always thought it silly that the same base vehicle from Buick, Chevrolet, Oldsmobile, GMC would have different trim levels (and often different reliability), and often a different brand on the engine and major parts. LET'S SUE GM!!! It's silly...

It's based on the market power of each individual company.

 

[return2sendai]

Automobile manufacturers aren't allowed to restrict where we buy gasoline for our cars, and smartphone makers shouldn't be allowed to restrict where we buy apps for our phones.

If you have a diesel car, you fill up at a diesel pump. If you have an electric car, you fill up at an electric charger. There are different gasoline grades, different octane grades… your car determines your power source. So your analogy doesn’t really work.

 

[0924487]

Without taking sides… but… from a legal POV: Isn’t it true that the business model of Cydia relies on the fact that people do something that is against the EULA that they previously agreed upon? Namely: jailbreaking their device which is basically exploiting a security-vulnerability to change certain OS-parameters.

I wonder how Freeman is arguing that closing those vulnerabilities is primary done to prevent the use of cydia 🤨

Jailbreaking and reverse engineering software is legal in most countries.

 

[eric89074]

Apple should just bite the bullet and allow side loading. They’re going to be forced to anyways.

 

[theluggage]

If I want to purchase a music artists album, I can walk into multiple brick and mortor stores or from any of the multiple online music stores.

The artist/record label is perfectly free to make their new release (for example) an iTunes or Spotify exclusive, or only sell it through their own online store. Where that has been tried by a major act, it has got a pretty bad reception from customers, but it wasn't illegal.

Alternatively - good luck watching the new Stranger Things without subscribing (directly or indirectly) to Netflix.

Neither of those is quite the same as the App Store situation (where Apple is saying that to publish on media X you have to sell through our store) - although there have been plenty of record/tape/MP3 players with proprietary media formats (go watch TechMoan on YouTube).

If I want to purchase a console game, again I can walk into multiple brick and mortor stores or from any of the multiple online gaming/retail stores.

That's a really bad example when many console platforms require developers to licensed and approved by the manufacturer. Even then, the only reason you can buy software in shops is because the publishers have allowed it (they don't have to but it's usually bad for business not too). Also, if you've bought software in a store recently it's often more like buying a voucher that lets you download it from the publisher's website - only one step removed from buying an iTunes voucher.

But if I want to purchase an app for my iphone I have only one option and that is Apple's app store.

...and you knew that when you bought an iPhone instead of an Android phone.

So why is it that manufacturers, companies and businesses are constally being told they must allow others access to their services, products or parts but yet when it comes to Apple it is allowed to restrict how the app store opperates (no 3rd party app hosters allowed, no sideloading allowed, no other online outlet allowed to host or sell Apple apps)

...because it's not illegal unless the company is deemed to be abusing a dominant market position, and that is a subjective question that can only be decided by paying lots of money to lawyers, lobbying government etc.

The other thing is that Apple are being accused of having a dominant position in a market (mobile phone Apps) which they played a major role in creating from scratch (either with the iPhone or earlier with iPod/iTunes) - whereas one of the key no-nos for monopoly abuse is leveraging a dominant position in one market to muscle in to another.

 

[genovelle]

Automobile manufacturers aren't allowed to restrict where we buy gasoline for our cars, and smartphone makers shouldn't be allowed to restrict where we buy apps for our phones.

Gasoline is strictly regulated by the government and can only have certain approved ingredients in it. That is tested and monitored constantly. A closer analogy would be the software that runs the car and other technology within it. Car companies can and do limit this because free access would be dangerous to the end user and everyone they come in contact with. The same with these stores. Android is a cesspool not just because of the bad apps affecting the people who download them, it by extension can infect the ecosystem because the bad software now has direct access to their family they share accounts and networks with and by extension their friend and contacts.

Here lies the slippery slope that has the potential to turn iOS into the garbage that is Android. And screw over every customer who bought their device to avoid that mess.

 

[jgassens]

And car manufacturers, e.g. Tesla, very well restrict what apps go on their in-car entertainment system. But somehow that’s not a problem, huh?

If enforcing these ridiculous “standards” was ok, it would have to apply to every company equally and you will quickly realize how insane that gets. What if I want my app to run on IoT washing machines? Do I get to sue those manufacturers as well because they don’t support it? ?‍♂️

Its wrong to sell a peice of hardware but not the means to control it to whatever extent you wish. If you want to be a capitalist, you need to be able to own the things you buy--a model where you pay for the privledge of being told what you can do with what you buy isn't capitalism. And there is 100% a move to force Tesla to open up.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

First sale does not require allowing access; just that their rights are exhausted in terms of resale. You are free to do to teh hardware what you want, but Apple does not have to make it possible to do anything. The could have sealed teh entire internals in epoxy if they wanted.

This includes the software of the device. But yes they could do whatever they want otherwise.

I find the "Apple has a monopoly in the mobile OS market" incorrect. There are plenty of competitors in that market; Apple does not dictate app prices beyond a minimum of 99 cents, and marks up prices that are set by developers to cover their cut like any store does.

Well it’s because they aren’t a monopoly, just having a heavy market impact, but they do have a monopoly on iOS software sales.

The question, IMHO, is whether consumers will benefit by lower prices if Apple is forced to allow alternative app stores. The answer seems to be no, as we did not see price drops when Apple lowered their take to 15% for small developers; all that happened was developers pocketed the windfall.

It would probably be to Apple's benefit to allow alternative app stores, since most would likely not offer as large a market as Apple, wind up charging a much as Apple, and Apple could introduce new charges taht are currently covered by the $99 developer fee.

Well we don’t know, as it could be like Microsoft store and have a 0% fee on everything but games. So far there’s no option.

The EPICs of the world could pull off their own store since they sell a product that ties in directly to their existing products and do not make money from being an App Store. Smaller stores would be challenged to be profitable, even Cydia struggled despite being popular in the jail break community. If sideloading makes pirating easier for the non-tech savvy users, developers may find themselves back to the old days bit copier era where popular programs were pirated easily. Android developers face serious piracy problems by all accounts, something Apple has managed to avoid so far.

I just don't see opening up the iPhone as a slam dunk win but rather a mixed bag of pros and cons.

iOS piracy is extremely easy to do and apple haven’t stopped it. You just need cydia impactor to sign your application with an apple certification and you can install it with zero issues.

 

[ian87w]

Automobile manufacturers aren't allowed to restrict where we buy gasoline for our cars, and smartphone makers shouldn't be allowed to restrict where we buy apps for our phones.

Wrong. Automobiles manufacturers even put clauses that you cannot put mods nor sell the car within a period of time. Go look at the ToS of owning a Ferrari.

You can buy gasoline wherever for your car, and you can use iPhones on any carriers that you want.

 

[BootsWalking]

If you have a diesel car, you fill up at a diesel pump. If you have an electric car, you fill up at an electric charger. There are different gasoline grades, different octane grades… your car determines your power source. So your analogy doesn’t really work.

And a car has four wheels and an iPhone does not so clearly my analogy doesn't apply

Apple makes different types of iOS devices that use different types of apps yet they all must be purchased from only Apple's store.

 

[BootsWalking]

Wrong. Automobiles manufacturers even put clauses that you cannot put mods nor sell the car within a period of time. Go look at the ToS of owning a Ferrari.

And what prevents a car owner from doing the things you say the manufacturer prohibits in those clauses? Nothing, outside of maybe warranty coverage, yet it's still an option for owners. That's not the case with iPhones.

You can buy gasoline wherever for your car, and you can use iPhones on any carriers that you want.

I can also use iPhones in any building or on any boat but that has no relevance to not being able to purchase apps from where I want.

 

[jlc1978]

Monopolies are generally considered anything over 50% share. it doesn't really matter if it's 51% or 99% and the more important issue is anticompetitive practices that would be alleged.

What is important is abuse of market power, not size.

Microsoft spent all its time and effort to make Windows what it was and court did tell them what they can't do. Same thing with AT&T and Standard Oil.

Oddly enough, kerosine was cheaper under Standard Oil's monopoly than after it was broken.

iOS piracy is extremely easy to do and apple haven’t stopped it.

No, but it's a lot less prevalent than on Android devices due to Apple's policy.

You just need cydia impactor to sign your application with an apple certification and you can install it with zero issues.

Having to resign every 7 days wasn't exactly easy, and last I saw CI now required a paid developer account. Ending the time limit by allowing sideloading would make piracy a lot more easy and not require a 3rd party app; making it the more likely for the casual user to pirate.

I think developers will find themselves needing to find ways to keep making money if piracy becomes easy for casual users. Which is my point - developers are likely to find piracy eating into sales; forcing them to go to more IAPs with some sort of license check and subscriptions to make money. Then of course, the same users that wanted sideloading will whine about what developers do to try to stay in business.

 

[BootsWalking]

Gasoline is strictly regulated by the government and can only have certain approved ingredients in it. That is tested and monitored constantly. A closer analogy would be the software that runs the car and other technology within it. Car companies can and do limit this because free access would be dangerous to the end user and everyone they come in contact with. The same with these stores. Android is a cesspool not just because of the bad apps affecting the people who download them, it by extension can infect the ecosystem because the bad software now has direct access to their family they share accounts and networks with and by extension their friend and contacts.

Here lies the slippery slope that has the potential to turn iOS into the garbage that is Android. And screw over every customer who bought their device to avoid that mess.

And yet even with that regulation we're fee to buy gasoline from whichever producer we want. The same is not true for apps. The fact that the government regulates an industry doesn't absolve that industry from anticompetitive practices. The use of hazardous materials that go into the manufacturing and disposal of electronics is strictly regulated by the government too btw.

 

[JippaLippa]

As others said; if that'll be the case other systems will also have to be opened too, like the xbox, playstation, switch and whatever new OS will be made available.
I'm not sure other companies will comply.
I feel like the regulators are all disproportionally ganging up on apple.

 

[XXPP]

Cydia is the living proof that Apple users (who want to) can easily handle multiple app stores and/or third party apps. If I am clever enough to know what and what not to download on my Macbook and Windows computer, I am sure can handle it on my iOS device too. Open the gates, Tim.

Gates to malware.

 

[BootsWalking]

As others said; if that'll be the case other systems will also have to be opened too, like the xbox, playstation, switch and whatever new OS will be made available.
I'm not sure other companies will comply.

It's not de facto true. The restrictions imposed by antitrust laws are based on market power and thus do not mean they'll apply to every company that makes computing devices with installable apps. It's a case by case basis.

I feel like the regulators are all disproportionally ganging up on apple.

It's the government's job to enforce the antitrust laws and by definition those laws disproportionately apply to companies with market power like Apple.

 

[ian87w]

And what prevents a car owner from doing the things you say the manufacturer prohibits in those clauses? Nothing, outside of maybe warranty coverage, yet it's still an option for owners. That's not the case with iPhones.

I can also use iPhones in any building or on any boat but that has no relevance to not being able to purchase apps from where I want.

Nothing stopping you from jailbreaking your iPhone.

The gasoline analogy has no relevance.

 

[TonnyM]

Yes, let judge prevents Apple from patching any vulnerabilities, can’t wait for it. It will be so beneficial to the user ?

 

[BootsWalking]

Nothing stopping you from jailbreaking your iPhone.

"There is currently no official jailbreak available for iOS 15. No jailbreak for iOS 15 has been publicly confirmed by any developer. However, there are developers who have tested a few jailbreak tools and methods on iOS 15. The majority of them are ineffective. However, certain jailbreak methods are partially compatible with iOS 15."

Source: https://www.cydiacloud.com/jailbreak/15/

The gasoline analogy has no relevance.

Because why? Reasons?

 

[jav6454]

i remember cydia, a true pioneer of the jailbreaking days. didn't it proceed the app store?

It existed first. It was the AppStore before apple had an AppStore

Yes and no. The true first App Store was Installer which was then followed by Cydia and then Apple's AppStore. Curious note, the AppStore's first logo is actually quite identical to Installer and Cydia. The AppStore also took elements from both Cydia and Installer.

 

[GMShadow]

I'm curious who's funding his legal fees.

$5 says it's Red China, just like Epic.

 

[jimbobb24]

Walmart has a monopoly on what is sold in Walmart. We are using monopoly in a ridiculous non economic way.

 

[ian87w]

"There is currently no official jailbreak available for iOS 15. No jailbreak for iOS 15 has been publicly confirmed by any developer. However, there are developers who have tested a few jailbreak tools and methods on iOS 15. The majority of them are ineffective. However, certain jailbreak methods are partially compatible with iOS 15."

Source: https://www.cydiacloud.com/jailbreak/15/

Because why? Reasons?

Then don't buy iPhones with iOS15. You're a power user, right? Figure it out.

The one who came up with gas analogy was you. And it has no relevance as with phones, the consumables are the minutes/internet quota, which is provided by carriers, and you can use iPhones on any carrier.