3 ms·
Is intentionally damaging someone without valid reason really sufficient to win a lawsuit? That seems pretty broad: I do that every time I browse the peanut but
by MichaelBurge 11y ago
Is intentionally damaging someone without valid reason really sufficient to win a lawsuit? That seems pretty broad: I do that every time I browse the peanut butter section at the supermarket.
If the CEO of Apple told the CEO of Uber over a recorded phone call, "The Board, the Shareholders, and I all agree on cutting your app out of the store for no reason other than we hate your guts and it'll bring us joy to watch you suffer", it still seems like that shouldn't be enough to win a lawsuit. It's Apple's store: They get to choose the apps they want in their store. What next - are we going to have judges force bookstores to stock books because "your reasons for not stocking the book aren't good enough"?
Of course, Uber surely has explicit agreements with Apple, Google, and even their hosting provider. You don't build a multibillion dollar business on top of someone without even calling them to make sure it's okay.
- rms_returns 11y agoCertainly, they will have to prove somehow that their app was ultimately removed owning to a competitor's pressure. If they can do that, then the monopolies act and everything will come into the picture. I'm not insinuating that any competitor is doing this to Uber, but that's pretty natural and apparent in this case. Naturally, the store is Apple's business and app publishing is a means of income. No sane business will refuse a business prospect on the grounds of "I don't like you". The only reasoning here is that a competitor is involved. But yeah, proving that in a court of law is a different thing altogether which Uber has to manage.