MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
54,213
16,028


Apple has been fighting an antitrust lawsuit against Blix, the developer of BlueMail, an app that was removed from the App Store in June 2019 after violating Apple's App Store guidelines.

bluemail-mac-app-store.jpg

Blix accused Apple of manipulating search results in its App Store to suppress third-party competition, and it also claimed that Apple had copied its patented messaging technology for the Sign In with Apple feature.

Blix had its lawsuit dismissed in December, but then refiled. Apple asked the judge to toss out the case, and the motion was granted, with the case being dismissed a second time on Friday. In a statement, Apple said that Blix had "alleged false conspiracy theories and anti-competitive claims," and that the judge's decision confirms that Apple has "consistently acted legally."
"Blix, a member of the Coalition for App Fairness and frequent complainer to press and regulators, alleged false conspiracy theories and anti-competitive claims against Apple. The court correctly rejected these claims and threw out Blix's case. This case demonstrates that Apple has consistently acted legally by introducing its own innovative products and features that promote competition."
According to the judge, Blix was unable to prove in court that Sign In with Apple restricted competition or that Apple's actions were harming competition.
Apple's current policy of requiring Sign In With Apple whenever any SSO product is offered permits new competitors and competition (including Blix) because it does not foreclose the use of other SSOs. Allowing competition is the opposite of unlawfully constraining competition, so, again, Blix has failed to state a claim.
Blix is one of several major developers that have joined the anti-Apple Coalition for App Fairness, a group that is against Apple's alleged anti-competitive policies and App Store fees. Other members include Spotify, Basecamp, Corellium, Epic Games, and Tile, all companies that have also had legal issues with Apple.

Update: In a statement, Blix said that it is disappointed by the court's decision.
Blix accurately described Apple’s monopoly power in mobile OS, and Apple chose not to contest that in court. At the same time, we are disappointed by the court's decision to somewhat signal that Apple can put sand in the gears to competitors and change its developer guidelines as it sees fit. This includes kicking BlueMail off the App Store for 8 months, stonewalling BlueMail for many weeks a year later and various other bullying tactics. These are facts that Apple did not refute in court.

We are glad that the fairness movement we’ve started for app developers to speak out the truth against Apple continues to gain momentum and we have high hopes that the Biden administration, the EU Commission, Australia and other countries will limit Apple's disproportionate power.

Blix will continue to fight for the fundamental and essential app developers’ rights and will stand firm in allowing fair and balanced competition. The digital markets would be much more innovative had Apple allowed for true competition. The ability to innovate by small businesses continues to be at stake.

Article Link: Apple Says Blix's Twice-Tossed Anti-Competitive Lawsuit Alleged 'False Conspiracy Theories' [Updated]
 
Last edited:

jav6454

macrumors P6
Nov 14, 2007
17,197
2,239
1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
So legally, they couldn't even convince a judge that their lawsuit merited a trial? That means they were grasping for straws.

However, as always, there is two sides to a tale.

Side note: Also, many apps like to allege anti-competitiveness; however, an installed user base will make their app successful as a good app attracts and self-promotes. A bad app just goes away. Not defending Apple, in general that's the rule of any service.
 
Last edited:
Comment

Cosmosent

macrumors 68000
Apr 20, 2016
1,975
2,274
La Jolla, CA
How-best to circumvent Apple's Stranglehold on App Discovery is the #1 challenge most App Devs have !

That's at the core of the problem.

Apple's cut is secondary, except to the companies who are already a Household Name !

"App Discovery" App Stores would go a long ways towards Fixing the Problem !

Apple would NO longer be able to Control the Narrative.

Why we don't have those already, at least here in the States, is very puzzling to me.

Congress has clearly been asleep at the wheel.

Or perhaps, Apple has been greasing their RE-election pockets (to prevent action) !

ONE Prime Example is all it will take for the App Store to be Broken Up !

IMO, "Suppression of Third-Party App Innovation" will very-likely be the Catalyst for the Break Up.

Are there examples of that today that can proven in court ?

YES, absolutely YES !

Phil Schiller "may" soon become a sacrificial lamb !

To protect Cook & the Apple brand, that is.
 
Comment

havenyoung

macrumors 6502
Oct 22, 2013
283
197
I'm missing something here. If I want to build my own SSO method and make it the exclusive option for my App, and Apple says no, you have to also include SIWA along side it, even if I don't want that...how exactly is that not anti-competitive behavior?
make it the exclusive option for my App
That's anti-competitive.
 
Comment

cmaier

macrumors Penryn
Jul 25, 2007
24,000
30,137
California
How-best to circumvent Apple's Stranglehold on App Discovery is the #1 challenge most App Devs have !

That's at the core of the problem.

Apple's cut is secondary, except to the companies who are already a Household Name !

"App Discovery" App Stores would go a long ways towards Fixing the Problem !

Apple would NO longer be able to Control the Narrative.

Why we don't have those already, at least here in the States, is very puzzling to me.

Congress has clearly been asleep at the wheel.

Or perhaps, Apple has been greasing their RE-election pockets (to prevent action) !

ONE Prime Example is all it will take for the App Store to be Broken Up !

IMO, "Suppression of Third-Party App Innovation" will very-likely be the Catalyst for the Break Up.

Are there examples of that today that can proven in court ?

YES, absolutely YES !

Phil Schiller "may" soon become a sacrificial lamb !

To protect Cook & the Apple brand, that is.

“I can’t understand why my ****** app isn’t selling! It must be because of ‘app discovery!’ Damned Apple!”
 
Comment

thenewperson

macrumors 6502
Mar 27, 2011
462
313
I'm missing something here. If I want to build my own SSO method and make it the exclusive option for my App, and Apple says no, you have to also include SIWA along side it, even if I don't want that...how exactly is that not anti-competitive behavior?
If you build your own method Apple doesn't require you to add SIWA. It's when you use a 3rd party one.

However, I'm a bit at a loss how even forcing SIWA on every app is anti-competitive if they aren't taking away the ability to use yours still.
 
Comment

farewelwilliams

Suspended
Jun 18, 2014
4,966
18,034
I'm missing something here. If I want to build my own SSO method and make it the exclusive option for my App, and Apple says no, you have to also include SIWA along side it, even if I don't want that...how exactly is that not anti-competitive behavior?

if it's your own SSO for your own APP, you don't need SIWA

if you add FB + your own SSO, you need SIWA
 
Comment

cicalinarrot

macrumors regular
Apr 28, 2015
185
622
Sounds a lot like what Microsoft said when they needed to destroy Netscape and used their clearly superior power to do so.
Apple’s closed ecosystem is mostly good and it also is because they can force people into it. They may be good at what they do but they shouldn’t have too much power because of it.
 
Comment

Robert.Walter

macrumors 68020
Jul 10, 2012
2,013
2,488
Besides the fact that that so few websites and apps offer SIWA, the thing that chills me about using it is that once you set up an account with it or convert to it, there’s no seeming way to go back to using e/m + p/w style authentication.

I don’t want that kind of lock in.

I am however converting all my emails to Apple’s Hide My Email as it’s revertable to a regular e/m address if desired.
 
Comment

Lemon Olive

Suspended
Nov 30, 2020
1,208
1,316
If you build your own method Apple doesn't require you to add SIWA. It's when you use a 3rd party one.

However, I'm a bit at a loss how even forcing SIWA on every app is anti-competitive if they aren't taking away the ability to use yours still.
Well that would be because they are undermining your ability as a developer to provide the sign in experience and method that you want.
 
Comment

Lemon Olive

Suspended
Nov 30, 2020
1,208
1,316
That's anti-competitive.
I'm not a platform. I'm the player. My job is to compete. Not enable competition. The platform's responsibility is to enable competition. Apple creates issues by being both platform and #1 player on their own platform.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: SFjohn
Comment

parkov

macrumors newbie
Aug 29, 2005
24
19
Companies could try and make great products that people want or they can continue to pretend there is a monopoly at play. Pick which you direction you support.
Not familiar with the case and not saying it's what happened here, but both can be true.
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.