I give this suit tacit support only because i see OS X going the same way very soon.
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.
Court Rules Apple Can Be Sued for Monopolizing iPhone App Market
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Err... umm.. lower prices?
What universe he this guy from? It's soooo cheep right now most dev's are begging for donations half the time.. Whats next, turn it into a socialist market where devs get paid by the Gov't to make free apps?
This is a stupid case. It's in the category of a legal trolling case.. I bet they just want a payoff to make it go away.
What universe he this guy from? It's soooo cheep right now most dev's are begging for donations half the time.. Whats next, turn it into a socialist market where devs get paid by the Gov't to make free apps?
This is a stupid case. It's in the category of a legal trolling case.. I bet they just want a payoff to make it go away.
judges in America need to be replaced - they allow frivolous lawsuits like this. There is tons of competition in the App store - and the prices couldn't possibly be any lower. Hell most of the apps are free with in-app purchases
are Android apps cheaper? This is like saying - i'm going to shop in a Walmart store but be able to pay Target for the product. Apple built the store and built the phone.
are Android apps cheaper? This is like saying - i'm going to shop in a Walmart store but be able to pay Target for the product. Apple built the store and built the phone.
by not letting users purchase apps from third-party sources, there was no price competition, leading to higher app prices.
How ? App developers decide the price of the app, Apple doesn't dictate the price of the app.
What next Only Apple making/Selling iPhone is anti competitive, other manufacturers should be able to make/sell iPhones ?
How ? App developers decide the price of the app, Apple doesn't dictate the price of the app.
What next Only Apple making/Selling iPhone is anti competitive, other manufacturers should be able to make/sell iPhones ?
Last edited:
Good news indeed.
The restaurant comment is pointless, how about you change that to "all the restaurants are owned by one company" so they can not only set the menu, they control the price too. Opening this up will be a plus for all. If you want to eat at apple still, you can, if you want to walk down the road you also "could"..
The restaurant comment is pointless, how about you change that to "all the restaurants are owned by one company" so they can not only set the menu, they control the price too. Opening this up will be a plus for all. If you want to eat at apple still, you can, if you want to walk down the road you also "could"..
Abuah?!
what?
listen, i'm all against monopolistic competitive practices.
I'm all for releasing some stranglehold on economies that filthy rich have. i'm all for competition for luxury items.
but There's no monopoly here. If you don't like Apple's app store policy, There's a giant swath of Android manufacturers out there offering competitions, many come with their own App stores. If you're looking for an open and free market, that exists.
But where then does this "monopoly" end? What about OS? Apple has 100% of iOS installations on iPhones. is that not a monopoly preventing me choice of what OS I want? (although, I would love to buy an iPhone running android)
this is a slippery slope. Sometimes, yes, Lawsuits are required to keep a company in check, but sometimes, these things are more dangerous to the market than helpful
Part of the problem is what apps you can buy. Some venues are excluded by Apple based on either the rules, guidelines, or Apple's arbitrary decision. Have alternatives would be beneficial. As to the vetting / review / other, that can be part of the discussion on how these apps get certified "works on iDevices".
What you said. Not to mention we would have another ios app store full to the brim with pirated or ripped off/cloned apps. It is difficult already, but this would be a disaster for app developers.
"there was no price competition, leading to higher app prices."
All Apple has to do on appeal here is point out that the vast, vast, vast majority of apps are FREE.
What a ********, terrible lawsuit.
All Apple has to do on appeal here is point out that the vast, vast, vast majority of apps are FREE.
What a ********, terrible lawsuit.
Haha so 30% of that 1 trillion dollars eh? Easy come easy go...
Apple do deserve this and hopefully it'll impact on others like Alphabet too. It's incredibly limiting I think that you can't buy any IAPs without Apple enforcing its cut, and we all know what happens if a dev try's to circumvent it all!
Apple do deserve this and hopefully it'll impact on others like Alphabet too. It's incredibly limiting I think that you can't buy any IAPs without Apple enforcing its cut, and we all know what happens if a dev try's to circumvent it all!
Last edited:
Free? Chuckle. That is only a portion of it.
Pay, In-App Pay, Advertisements. Pick one or more.
Those who give up their freedom in return for a little security... etc (although that's not what Franklin actually meant).
Apple has used their monopoly power to censor apps, and to ban apps that compete with their own apps.
If Microsoft had tried to force a Microsoft-only app store back in the early days of PDAs and smartphones, people would've screamed bloody murder.
A more correct analogy would be buying a Ford automobile and then only allowed to buy gasoline from Ford. I agree with this ruling.
So when some idiot downloads an app from "Bob's" App store and it steals all their financial information do they get to sue Apple for not preventing it? These are simply lawyers looking for a payday. And who gives a crap about Windows users not being able to use Linux or Mac apps? When you make a choice that's your choice. The other choice is to buy all three and use what you want, when you want to. I say again, MONEY GRAB.
This concept crossed my mind almost immediately after the AppStore was born. But I wasn't a lawyer then, not am I now. It always seemed anticompetitive to me (regardless of tangible merits).
Apple offers the App Store as a platform for extension to iPhone. They don't control the market or prices, which is by Developers, within that platform. The original statement will hold up in court.
This is in no way about how you can't replace Safari with Chrome in iOS, btw. I see a lot of people making it out that Apple is monopolizing the iPhone... which they kind of are, but can do legally.
This is in no way about how you can't replace Safari with Chrome in iOS, btw. I see a lot of people making it out that Apple is monopolizing the iPhone... which they kind of are, but can do legally.
You miss the point, App prices are still set by App developers, even if other App stores are allowed on iPhone App developer still sets the price, so how competition will decrease App price, please explain.
"Censor" apps? That's like saying you should be allowed to sell things under the Wal-Mart banner in a competing space because the real stores don't carry adult magazines.
Agree. It's not a monopoly. I mean, there are SO MANY examples of why and how this would goof up many other companies. But this decision wasn't about the issue, just the right of a lawsuit to go forward.
Scare tactics. Let's see what is proposed and see how these get a "Certified to work with iDevices".
Most apps are free or very inexpensive. What competition are you talking about. If I look for a word in the app store, say "TAX" numerous apps come up. There is plenty of competition.
Show me one restaurant with free food.
You are, but only because the article buried the lede. Today's decision wasn't about the merits of the case at all. It simply concerned the doctrine of "standing," which boils down to who is a proper party to bring a lawsuit. The court simply held that purchasers, not merely developers, could bring a lawsuit alleging monopolization. Importantly, the court did *not* hold that the App Store is a market that could be monopolized.
Does this happen in the PC, OSX, etc world? (Real question, I honestly don't know). I'm leaning towards not because the fault lies on the seller of said application (which we used to simply call programs or software).
That's not illegal and monopolies are also not illegal in US, it is the anti-competitive behaviors that are illegal and these folks must convince the jury or judge that Apple intentionally blocked developers from competing against each other at their store. The laws do not prohibit owners from controlling their own stores, Apple has 100% ownership of their platform and are not obligated to open it up to anyone.
Unless the customers can prove that Apple does not permit developers from completing with each other, they're not going to win this one.
If they do, every single company in the US will be joining Apple on the appeal because it will break every company's rights to control their platforms.
Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo will be compel to open their platforms to alternative stores. Good luck with that.