5 ms·

Question: How can Apple have a monopoly if a customer can decide to buy a competitor's phone to use as they please (Android, etc). That's where I get lost. The

by lalos 7y ago

Question: How can Apple have a monopoly if a customer can decide to buy a competitor's phone to use as they please (Android, etc). That's where I get lost. The Windows/Netscape made sense since the claim was that Windows dominated the market almost completely (around 90% on those times?). Can I sue any other hardware device company (smart fridges, smart tvs, rokus) for monopoly since I can't load my own apps on them? Anyways, having an alternate app store on iOS sounds good to me.

DannyBee 7y ago
This is specifically about the app store. Antitrust is all about defining markets (which lots of people at HN don't get). How the court defines the market will decide whether you win or lose in almost all cases. Here, this is a case about the app store. The market was defined as consumers of apple phones who use the app store. In that market, apple is clearly a monopolist. In some larger or smaller market, they may not be.
- lalos 7y ago
  Thanks for that pointer, this seems to a good read for more info on defining markets. https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/atr/legacy/2012/08/22/286279.pdf https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/atr/legacy/2012/...
- hestefisk 7y ago
  Very helpful thanks.
- conanbatt 7y ago
  Lke Thiel says, if you have a monopoly you define yourself as "part of the industry software" to dilute the actual monopolistic position
ltbarcly3 7y ago
To my understanding, anti-trust laws are generally designed to discourage the ability of companies to use success in one area to capture customers and thus have monopolistic pricing ability in another area. In this case I think it is going to be a hard sell to demonstrate an anti-trust issue, but "A vertical arrangement may violate the antitrust laws, however, if it reduces competition among firms at the same level (say among retailers or among wholesalers) or prevents new firms from entering the market."[1] I think claiming that Apple has some kind of monopoly on the smartphone market is a nonstarter, since they are well below 50% of the smartphone market in every country, including the US. It's not clear that Apple's policies reduce competition among firms at the application creator level. However, Apples policies clearly do prevent new firms from entering the market. For example, Apple has explicit rules forbidding entire classes of apps that it believes compete with it's own services. I think you might be able to make the following case, although the lack of an actual monopoly makes it more difficult (but not impossible) to frame it as an anti-trust issue: The levels of this vertical integration are 1. selling phone hardware 2. providing phone operating systems 3. reselling of applications (app stores) 4. production and sale of applications (app developers). Apple doesn't allow competing app stores at all on the hardware it sells, so it's clearly using it's control of a large segment of the smartphone hardware selling market in a way that discourages competition in the application store market. [1] https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws/dealings-supply-chain https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-a...
- briandear 7y ago
  iOS is about 53% of the US market in the US, Android being about 47%.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
chungleong 7y ago
That's why the suit will probably fail in the end. In terms of app selection, Android is not inferior to iOS. People aren't choosing Apple's products because they have no other choice. They're buying them BECAUSE Apple has tighter control over the platform. If the company conducts a survey asking iPhone users if they want Play Store on their phone, I suspect the vast majority would vote no. The choice to install malware isn't one that people want.
- anfilt 7y ago
  Sorry since when is a closed platform a good choice? No one is saying you have to use an other App store. Apple is saying you can't even someone wants to. The only option is to Jailbreak your own device. Yes your own device not Apples.
- michaelmrose 7y ago
  Nobody is asking specifically if the majority of users want to specifically install the play store on their phones so answering a question nobody asked in the first place isn't terribly relevant. The question is if the way Apple controlled the market fell afoul of legal standards in a way that effected makers and users. If this is deemed so it would be true regardless of what percentage of users would install apps from a third party store.
  - chungleong 7y ago
    You're begging the question. Whether Apple in fact controls the market is the key point of contention here. If the company is simply responding to market demand then there is no credible theory of harm. I don't have any hard data but anecdotal evidences indicate people want more curation of apps, not less.

by lalos 7y ago

DannyBee 7y ago

This is specifically about the app store. Antitrust is all about defining markets (which lots of people at HN don't get). How the court defines the market will decide whether you win or lose in almost all cases. Here, this is a case about the app store. The market was defined as consumers of apple phones who use the app store. In that market, apple is clearly a monopolist. In some larger or smaller market, they may not be.

lalos 7y ago
Thanks for that pointer, this seems to a good read for more info on defining markets. https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/atr/legacy/2012/08/22/286279.pdf https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/atr/legacy/2012/...
hestefisk 7y ago
Very helpful thanks.
conanbatt 7y ago
Lke Thiel says, if you have a monopoly you define yourself as "part of the industry software" to dilute the actual monopolistic position

ltbarcly3 7y ago

To my understanding, anti-trust laws are generally designed to discourage the ability of companies to use success in one area to capture customers and thus have monopolistic pricing ability in another area. In this case I think it is going to be a hard sell to demonstrate an anti-trust issue, but "A vertical arrangement may violate the antitrust laws, however, if it reduces competition among firms at the same level (say among retailers or among wholesalers) or prevents new firms from entering the market."[1] I think claiming that Apple has some kind of monopoly on the smartphone market is a nonstarter, since they are well below 50% of the smartphone market in every country, including the US. It's not clear that Apple's policies reduce competition among firms at the application creator level. However, Apples policies clearly do prevent new firms from entering the market. For example, Apple has explicit rules forbidding entire classes of apps that it believes compete with it's own services. I think you might be able to make the following case, although the lack of an actual monopoly makes it more difficult (but not impossible) to frame it as an anti-trust issue: The levels of this vertical integration are 1. selling phone hardware 2. providing phone operating systems 3. reselling of applications (app stores) 4. production and sale of applications (app developers). Apple doesn't allow competing app stores at all on the hardware it sells, so it's clearly using it's control of a large segment of the smartphone hardware selling market in a way that discourages competition in the application store market. [1] https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws/dealings-supply-chain https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-a...

briandear 7y ago
iOS is about 53% of the US market in the US, Android being about 47%.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]

chungleong 7y ago

That's why the suit will probably fail in the end. In terms of app selection, Android is not inferior to iOS. People aren't choosing Apple's products because they have no other choice. They're buying them BECAUSE Apple has tighter control over the platform. If the company conducts a survey asking iPhone users if they want Play Store on their phone, I suspect the vast majority would vote no. The choice to install malware isn't one that people want.

anfilt 7y ago
Sorry since when is a closed platform a good choice? No one is saying you have to use an other App store. Apple is saying you can't even someone wants to. The only option is to Jailbreak your own device. Yes your own device not Apples.
michaelmrose 7y ago
Nobody is asking specifically if the majority of users want to specifically install the play store on their phones so answering a question nobody asked in the first place isn't terribly relevant. The question is if the way Apple controlled the market fell afoul of legal standards in a way that effected makers and users. If this is deemed so it would be true regardless of what percentage of users would install apps from a third party store.
- chungleong 7y ago
  You're begging the question. Whether Apple in fact controls the market is the key point of contention here. If the company is simply responding to market demand then there is no credible theory of harm. I don't have any hard data but anecdotal evidences indicate people want more curation of apps, not less.