What I'm saying is Apple controls 100% of app distribution. The way Apple's businesses are vertically integrated means they control everything
Oh, really Apple controls app distribution even across Android devices? That was Standard Oil. Which is very different from Apple where they only actually control 20% of the total market of mobile phones.
Obviously, you're saying Apple "100% controls" apps and games in their App Store. But, so does Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo, Steam, even EPIC -- they 100% control apps and games on their own hardware or software stores. If you're a game developer, you can't get your Xbox, Playstation, or Nintendo game to appear on a Target, Walmart, Best Buy, or GameStop physical store shelf without signing agreements with them and paying 30%. Those are monopolies. 100% control. No side loading. No 3rd party distribution. No direct sales to customers -- even though Xbox and Playstation have web browsers and are just literal PCs under the hood.
Yet, guess what. The courts have upheld their 100% control of games on their hardware for the past 30-35 years.
And just like how AT&T was broken up due to their abuse of their vertically integrated market position, Apple may one day face the same consequence.
Uh... you realize it was the US Department of Justice in 1913 that literally gave AT&T a government protected monopoly, right? They were given such and given protection from competition because the government wanted a single reliable phone service built nationwide. Seven decades later, after the nationwide public phone network was built-out, in the 1980's that monopoly was rescinded as they no longer found it necessary for multiple reasons.
But, you do know, that it's not only legally created monopolies that OK, right? Without the will of local, state, or federal legislature or department -- You can yourself achieve, or create a monopoly, even maintain said monopoly, and be legal.
Specifically, I'd like to direct your attention to the
FTC's own Guide to Antitrust wherein they explicitly state: "
it is not illegal for a company to have a monopoly, to charge "high prices," or to try to achieve a monopoly position by what might be viewed by some as particularly aggressive methods."
What matters is whether your maintenance of said monopoly is through: "
unreasonable methods."
Which is where Epic really doesn't have a very good case. If everyone else (Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo, Steam, etc) was offering 12% commission where Apple was charging 30%, it would be a different case. If Apple, decided to increase commission to 35%, 40%, or 50%, again, this would be a different case. If Apple, sought to preclude you from writing Android apps as contractual requirement for the approval of your Apps - again, a different and better case.
But, just charging "high prices" or being aggressive and not allowing side-loading of games and apps, Like it or not, alone it's not illegal.
www.businessofapps.com
It's almost like Apple's tight control of their hardware and their app store instead *is* what makes it far more valuable to consumers and developers alike. And that prohibiting that control would instead be detrimental.
www.manufacturing.net
