Apple Met With DOJ Antitrust Chief in Bid to Head Off Antitrust Lawsuit

[sw1tcher]

**** off. Let companies operate however they choose. If you don't like how they operate, USE SOMETHING ELSE AND SHUT UP.

You obviously don't understand the purpose and intent of antitrust laws:

Congress passed the first antitrust law, the Sherman Act, in 1890 as a "comprehensive charter of economic liberty aimed at preserving free and unfettered competition as the rule of trade." In 1914, Congress passed two additional antitrust laws: the Federal Trade Commission Act, which created the FTC, and the Clayton Act. With some revisions, these are the three core federal antitrust laws still in effect today.

The antitrust laws proscribe unlawful mergers and business practices in general terms, leaving courts to decide which ones are illegal based on the facts of each case. Courts have applied the antitrust laws to changing markets, from a time of horse and buggies to the present digital age. Yet for over 100 years, the antitrust laws have had the same basic objective: to protect the process of competition for the benefit of consumers, making sure there are strong incentives for businesses to operate efficiently, keep prices down, and keep quality up.

 

[one more]

If you go to a Sony store or GM or Honda dealership naturally they will favour their own products first. If you don’t like their products you go somewhere else.

This is not a valid analogy, though. You cannot compare Sony or GM or Honda, all of which have a lot of competitive options in various price brackets to just two choices - iOS or Android, as it is the case with smartphones. My guess is that if you had only two car makers in the entire world, they would be much more scrutinised by the governments and NGOs as well.

 

[vipergts2207]

Do as I say, and not as I do. Got it. At any rate this is about 6 off-topic posts too many at this point.

Oy vey, you can have the final off-topic post.

Easiest way for Apple to avoid scrutiny by the DoJ and from other countries is to just spin off the App Store business.

The problem with that is Apple would then complain about the 15% / 30% fee they'd have to pay which is basically them admitting that those fees are high. So I guess an App Store spin off is out of the question.

I would agree, I don't see Apple choosing to spin off the App Store. The only way that would happen is if the DOJ went the extreme route of forcing a breakup of Apple, which I don't think is being sought nor even warranted at this point.

 

[one more]

Try selling your app on another app store or on your own store/website. Not gonna happen since Apple does not allow 3rd party app stores or sideloading.

We shall see quite soon how well (or not) 3rd party app stores or sideloading will work in the EU. In fact, we cannot even be sure yet that the current Apple’s proposed system will be accepted as is by the EU.

 

[CubeHacker]

Apple mismanaged users’ ability to install their own software. Apple had the opportunity to chart their own course but now world governments are doing it for them. Read between the lines: like it or not, believe it or reject it, this is a last-ditch effort to bribe officials and create a settlement that is most-favorable to Apple.

Exactly what I was thinking. Shouldn't it be illegal for anyone to "have a meeting with" the DOJ antitrust chief just before they are supposed to be ruled on by them?

 

[Brandon916]

I don’t see how Apple is stifling innovation and competition. They create their own hardware and software which allows their ecosystem to sync smoothly across their devices. As far as I know no other computer manufacturer does that, at least nowhere to the same extent.

If you go to a Sony store or GM or Honda dealership naturally they will favour their own products first. If you don’t like their products you go somewhere else.

Apple is not a Best Buy or Sears or any other department store known for stocking/selling all manner of different brands and products.

Seems to me there a lot of envious people who want a piece of Apple’s business and/or to play in Apple’s sandbox and think they should be able to do it wth little to no cost.

Business is competitive and to some extent cutthroat. Apple, like many others, has been successful in carving out its own niche. I don’t see Apple doing anything other companies wouldn’t do given the opportunity and/or ability.

That is because you have your apple fan blinders on. Tons of companies have come forward about their bad behavior. Look up tile. Before Apple launched AirTags, they did a bunch of stuff to ruin Tile user interface to make the experience worst. Just in time before Apple launched their own. Look up wordpress. They wouldn't allow them to update their app unless they added a shoping cart. It took wordpress going to the public and putting apple on blast before they walked it back and apologize.
Also look up AT&T. They got too big and the govt broke them up. No monolopy is allowed in US. If it gets too big, govt will break them up. It's not the first time it has happened. MS got clamped down by the govt too.

 

[webkit]

Apple is still a drop in the bucket. Less than 50% depending on what you consider to your market which can be global, continental, state, city or municipality. However we’ll find out if operating system choice really plays a part in all of this.

iPhone having the largest share in the U.S. (around 55% to 60% or so depending on source) is hardly a drop in the bucket especially when the next largest share (Samsung) is notably less than that. Apple is clearly a dominant player and no drop in the bucket.

 

[webkit]

Exactly what I was thinking. Shouldn't it be illegal for anyone to "have a meeting with" the DOJ antitrust chief just before they are supposed to be ruled on by them?

Meetings like this are not unusual. The DOJ would also rather see an acceptable agreement/settlement than have to sue and go to trial. The key word, of course, being "acceptable."

 

[Brandon916]

I have said it many times here. Apple has billions of dollars. It should buy an island and declare it as a sovereign nation. Then it can have the rules that it wants. No worry about DOJ and Antitrust and other such stuff.

You need to hear yourself and how delusional you sound. You don't know about china and taiwan ha? Guess who Taiwan is asking to help protect them if China ever invades. Yeah, lets see how Apple handles being their own nation w/ zero military weapons. US spends over $800B a year in military, you think apple pull this kind of money to protect themselves?

Yeah, go ahead Apple. Leave US and start your own nation w/ your own rules. Good luck w/ that.

 

[bobbie424242]

Apple should get pu

Ah a tired old trope comparing retail stores to digital markets. Has anybody mentioned games consoles yet?

What about retiring from the US market ?

Joke aside, Apple is under attack !!! Raise your pitchforks to defend your favorite 3 billions $ company and best friend. Apple absolutely needs your support, especially your cool 15-30% app store money.

 

[Beautyspin]

You need to hear yourself and how delusional you sound. You don't know about china and taiwan ha? Guess who Taiwan is asking to help protect them if China ever invades. Yeah, lets see how Apple handles being their own nation w/ zero military weapons. US spends over $800B a year in military, you think apple pull this kind of money to protect themselves?

Yeah, go ahead Apple. Leave US and start your own nation w/ your own rules. Good luck w/ that.

Ever heard of sarcasm? Can't you recognize one unless you see /s or some other indication?

 

[Beautyspin]

Doesn’t quite work like that. They’re rich, they’re not sovereign nation rich. And they won’t be rich for long if no one trades with them because they won’t follow rules.

Where is Nithyananda's 'Kailasa'? How did he build his country and how can you build yours?

Fugitive rape-accused Nithyananda is in the news after his disciple Vijayapriya Nithyananda, along with five other women, represented his "country" Kailasa at a UN conference on February 24. But where is this Kailasa and what can you do to build a country of your own?

www.indiatoday.in

This is guy is nowhere as rich as Apple, but he has his own country. It can be done, and in any case, it was sarcasm.

 

[Beautyspin]

What do you think this would accomplish? It is not simply a matter of where a company is incorporated. To do business in the United States, you have to follow the laws of the United States. Moving or having their own sovereign nation would have no benefit.

While it was sarcasm, I think fans would go there and buy it or get things shipped through a third-party or something. Isn't China selling stuff to US people even though they are banned from doing so?

 

[Ethosik]

So really you're not trapped and have another option. You've simply chosen the least bad one. You're not necessarily in love with Spectrum, it's just that on the whole, what they offer is better than a wireless provider. It seems that in your view Spectrum could make some improvements to improve your experience as a customer.

Hey you know what, this sounds really similar to the counterargument to the suggestion that iPhone users who want certain changes to the platform should just buy an Android. So I guess it really does seem that purchasing and using the imperfect is often still better than purchasing and using something worse or even nothing at all.

For gigabit internet I’m trapped.

I also get more dropped network when I use cellular.

What are we talking about here. This is back in the old days “you aren’t trapped you can use dial up”.

And how is that any different than people that claim to be “locked in” with iPhone? How are you more locked in than a freaking ISP that is based on physical locations

 

[I7guy]

iPhone having the largest share in the U.S. (around 55% to 60% or so depending on source) is hardly a drop in the bucket especially when the next largest share (Samsung) is notably less than that. Apple is clearly a dominant player and no drop in the bucket.

You’re right. iPhones are popular in the US. And hence why even more I am a firm believer that popularity should not be a criteria in antitrust. If apple did the same thing when they weren’t popular, that’s when they should have been approached by the DOJ.

 

[vipergts2207]

For gigabit internet I’m trapped.

I also get more dropped network when I use cellular.

What are we talking about here. This is back in the old days “you aren’t trapped you can use dial up”.

And how is that any different than people that claim to be “locked in” with iPhone? How are you more locked in than a freaking ISP that is based on physical locations

Wireless is a (worse) alternative for you the same way an Android is a (worse) alternative for many iPhone users. Your choice isn't Spectrum or move, your choice is Spectrum or wireless. You can throw in move as a third choice if you really want to.

Already usurped by this gem ..

Funny that they failed to acknowledge that popularity is another way to say market share, which is incredibly important and relevant when it comes to monopolies and anti-trust issues.

 

[tazinlwfl]

Easiest way for Apple to avoid scrutiny by the DoJ and from other countries is to just spin off the App Store business.

The problem with that is Apple would then complain about the 15% / 30% fee they'd have to pay which is basically them admitting that those fees are high. So I guess an App Store spin off is out of the question.

You’re presuming that Apple doesn’t already take 15% / 30% of the revenue of their services like Apple Music and allocate it to the App Store revenue, writing it off as “costs” to operate the services. You just invented an entire scenario of them admitting that the fees are high to validate your presumption. Incredible.

 

[Ethosik]

Wireless is a (worse) alternative for you the same way an Android is a (worse) alternative for many iPhone users. Your choice isn't Spectrum or move, your choice is Spectrum or wireless. You can throw in move as a third choice if you really want to.

I need gigabit speeds. It’s a requirement. That rules out wireless entirely.

 

[djphat2000]

That is true. And it's also true that a store cannot prevent the maker of a product from selling said product on their own, through their own store, or at another store. This is not the case with Apple.

Not entirely. Fortnite is available on other digital stores and their own. While it was available on the AppStore. Apple did not prevent or make it not available on the AppStore during that time. The issue was strictly IAP which EPIC broke the rules by allowing the customer to purchase outside of the AppStore. This is something you could do outside the AppStore if you wanted too by purchasing direct. Only Apple and Google did not allow you to show a customer that you could while in the app on iOS or Android. No different than in a physical store. Any product you pick up will not state on it, You can purchase me cheaper at the store across the street or down the road, etc.

Try selling your app on another app store or on your own store/website. Not gonna happen since Apple does not allow 3rd party app stores or sideloading.

Within the EU that is changing, in the rest of the world you are not allowed to have a 3rd party appstore on an iPhone. Or side load. However, EPIC could and did sell their stuff elsewhere during that time they were on the platform. If I am not mistaken you could get vBUCKS via other means than through Apple.

 

[vipergts2207]

I need gigabit speeds. It’s a requirement. That rules out wireless entirely.

Oh ok, a lot of people need features unavailable on Android, so that rules out Android entirely.

 

[macsimcon]

Good thing the Justice Department is wasting time on Apple’s nonexistent monopoly, while doing nothing about the Albertsons merger, which will dramatically increase food prices. Nice priorities there, President Biden.

Would this have happened if Timmy weren’t so cheap, and had made the right campaign contributions?

Does the PlayStation store let you download Switch games? Does the Nintendo store let you download Xbox games?

Apple is not a monopoly and never has been. Android has a larger worldwide share than iOS, even if iPhones are more popular in the U.S., and the iPhone doesn’t have anywhere close to market dominance in the United States.

There are plenty of reasons to hate Big Tech: Amazon’s illegal abuse of monopoly power, or Facebook’s, or Google’s…but this isn’t one of them.

 

[vipergts2207]

Good thing the Justice Department is wasting time on Apple’s nonexistent monopoly, while doing nothing about the Albertsons merger, which will dramatically increase food prices. Nice priorities there, President Biden.

Biden administration sues to block Kroger-Albertsons supermarket merger

Americans have seen food-at-home prices climb more than 20% since the beginning of the pandemic.

www.nbcnews.com

As for Apple, you don't need to be a literal monopoly to face regulation.

 

[macsimcon]

That is because you have your apple fan blinders on. Tons of companies have come forward about their bad behavior. Look up tile. Before Apple launched AirTags, they did a bunch of stuff to ruin Tile user interface to make the experience worst. Just in time before Apple launched their own. Look up wordpress. They wouldn't allow them to update their app unless they added a shoping cart. It took wordpress going to the public and putting apple on blast before they walked it back and apologize.
Also look up AT&T. They got too big and the govt broke them up. No monolopy is allowed in US. If it gets too big, govt will break them up. It's not the first time it has happened. MS got clamped down by the govt too.

No monopoly is allowed in the U.S.? Are you insane? Facebook, Google, and Amazon are all monopolies. The Justice Department hasn’t done anything about monopolies since that moron Reagan told them not to. We now have scores of industries illegally dominated by just a few companies: technology, music,
entertainment, pharmaceuticals, health insurance, appliances, athletic shoes, eyeglasses, books, alcohol, drug stores, office supplies, airlines, cereal, rental cars, mattresses, candy…the list goes on and on.

 

[webkit]

You’re right. iPhones are popular in the US. And hence why even more I am a firm believer that popularity should not be a criteria in antitrust. If apple did the same thing when they weren’t popular, that’s when they should have been approached by the DOJ.

Antitrust laws are designed to address anticompetitive behavior among dominant companies which have notable power, influence, control, etc. of a market. Apple fits that description. Small companies do not have that kind of power, influence, control, etc. and therefore antitrust regulators aren't going to go after them and wouldn’t want to waste time/resources doing so. Addressing potential anticompetitive behavior from a company with 60% market share can be significantly more important and relevant than addressing behavior from a company with 6% share.

 

[webkit]

Good thing the Justice Department is wasting time on Apple’s nonexistent monopoly, while doing nothing about the Albertsons merger, which will dramatically increase food prices. Nice priorities there, President Biden.

Doing nothing? The FTC is suing to block the merger. According to the AP article linked below, Kroger and Albertsons together would control around 13% of the U.S. grocery market. That's much less than Apple's 61% share of the mobile OS market in the U.S. (according to Statcounter).

US sues to block merger of grocery giants Kroger and Albertsons, saying it could push prices higher

The Federal Trade Commission sued to block a proposed merger between the grocery giants, saying the $24.6 billion deal would eliminate competition and lead to higher prices.

apnews.com