A few different ways the DOJ could approach the anti-competitive issues: 1. Section 3.3.1 enforces monopoly in app development tools (GM won't allow parts made

A few different ways the DOJ could approach the anti-competitive issues: 1. Section 3.3.1 enforces monopoly in app development tools (GM won't allow parts made using CNC milling, only hand-milled parts) 2. App Store policies enforce monopoly over 175k+ apps/$1 billion+ iPhone App market (can only buy 3rd-party parts for your car at a GM dealership, and nowhere else) 3. Apple approval needed to get on devices (GM has to approve all parts before they go in your car) 4. Apple takes 30% of developer revenues (non-OEM part manufacturers have to pay GM to sell parts for your car) 5. Using a payment mechanism other than iTunes is prohibited - e.g. a free app that you pay for with paypal (can only use GMAC credit card to pay for your car parts) 6. Apple doesn't approve applications that compete with Apple's apps - "duplicate existing functionality" (can't put aftermarket rims on your car) 7. Installation of non-Apple-Approved software voids warranty (installing a 3rd-party part voids entire warranty) (Many of these claims could, and should, apply equally to game console manufacturers. The homebrew scene just lacks a public profile like Adobe, a public enemy like Steve Jobs, and attorneys.) Not sure if this is a valid legal heuristic, but as an exercise, imagine what would happen should each of these restrictions be lifted. Would there be many entrants into that market? Would innovation and value creation result? The answer is unequivocally yes.