MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
53,516
15,247


Apple has filed a subpoena against the Coalition for App Fairness, requesting details on their communications as Apple fights a series of antitrust lawsuits. The Coalition for App Fairness comprises several companies who have been critical of Apple's App Store rules and fees, including Epic Games, Spotify, Deezer, Tile, and Match Group.

coalition-upscale-feature.jpg

Members of the Coalition for App Fairness earlier this month filed a lawsuit (via Apple Insider) attempting to prevent Apple's subpoenas from being approved. The Coalition for App Fairness is afraid that Apple will use those private communications to retaliate against coalition members.

The Coalition for App Fairness says that it is not involved in Apple's antitrust matters, which were filed before the coalition was formed. Apple has also subpoenaed communications from Forbes Tate Partners LLC, a public affairs firm used by the Coalition for App Fairness, and Meghan DiMuzio, the coalition's executive director.

Apple is seeking a "host of documents and communications," such as formation documents, activities, meeting minutes, recruitment efforts, membership lists, financing, communications between coalition members and potential members, and communications between coalition members and any foreign or domestic governmental entity or official relating to Apple.

The Coalition for App Fairness says that if the subpoenas are approved, it could "chill the candor" of member discussions and the "effectiveness of the Coalition's advocacy efforts."
Yet Apple has made intrusive demands for documents and communications with not even the slightest connection to that issue, such as the Coalition's internal governance documents, financial support, public-relations strategy, and vast amounts of confidential communications between and among Coalition staff, members, and others. The true purpose of Apple's discovery requests should be obvious: the company is seeking to punish its political opponents by prying into their confidential communications through burdensome and intrusive discovery.
Communications between coalition members are "irrelevant to the claims and defenses in the antitrust cases and are disproportional to the needs of the cases," according to the filing.

The Coalition for App Fairness has asked the judge to "quash" Apple's subpoenas entirely. Apple is seeking the documentation for the class action antitrust lawsuit that it is dealing with.



Article Link: Coalition for App Fairness: Apple is Using Subpoenas to Punish Opponents by Prying Into Confidential Communications
 

MauiPa

macrumors 68020
Apr 18, 2018
2,142
3,035
Oh no, we formed this bogus group to get what we wanted with little justification and tarted legal proceedings, what? the other party wants to know what is going on< this was supposed to be about them and not our made up stuff.

Seriously, for every "complaint" they came up with, they have a workaround. don't like commission, sell vbucks outside the App Store. Can't advertise on someone else's store, create your own store with links to download the apps. Pathetic really
 

IamTimCook

macrumors member
Dec 13, 2016
87
181
I wish these developers would realize their customers have voted on what they want the App Store to be.
iPhones are a fraction of the devices out there yet the App grosses over twice as much as the Google Play store.
Even Android customers don’t want to buy apps from the “open” cesspool know as Android market places.
Stop being greedy and putting your customers at risk. We have spoken, iOS users want a closed secure store.
 

fmillion

macrumors regular
Jun 16, 2011
106
232
I'm far from a lawyer so I admit I don't know how discovery works completely, but this seems awfully broad and unfiltered. Shouldn't discovery requests have to be specific to the case at hand, not just "we want to know everything?" Again IANAL but it feels like a discovery request should be treated similarly to a search warrant - very specific requests with justification for each. If you believe that I have done something that warrants suing me, do you then have the right to demand any personal data on me that you want, even if that data is very loosely or not even at all connected to the argument in question? If I ran a repair shop and was unable to repair your device and you wanted to sue me, would you automatically have the right to demand discovery on data about other customers? Private company meetings? My sales records? If you were to come into possession of that data, what would legally stop you from misusing it? Selling it to the highest bidder? Corporate espionage? Etc.

I don't necessarily think the entire request should be quashed, but it definitely should be toned down a lot. The problem, as the article states, is the potential chilling effect this can have - we already see just how powerful political pressure is on silencing unpopular opinions. Expressing your concerns and even suing someone should not automatically negate all of your rights to general privacy.

(Cue the Apple fanatics who will simply say "Good. Apple is right." lol)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.