Exclusivity deals are pretty complicated under the Sherman/Clayton acts. It's hotly contested - hardly "tolerated in just about every industry." Here are some l

Exclusivity deals are pretty complicated under the Sherman/Clayton acts. It's hotly contested - hardly "tolerated in just about every industry." Here are some links: https://www.businessjustice.com/is-exclusive-dealing-illegal-under-the-antitrust-laws.html https://www.businessjustice.com/is-exclusive-dealing-illegal... https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws/dealings-supply-chain/exclusive-dealing-or https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-a... https://www.theantitrustattorney.com/exclusive-dealing-agreement-violate-antitrust-laws/ https://www.theantitrustattorney.com/exclusive-dealing-agree... That's why this is going to the Supreme Court - we all recognize that the App Store uses exclusive dealing, but it's non-obvious whether or not it's lawful. >And places that sell things are well within their right to choose their vendors unless you want to demand that the BMV dealership be leglly required to sell Ford trucks if Ford desired. Not sure what that has to do with anything. Apple's point was that they aren't selling anything - therefore appstore customers wouldn't have standing to bring an antitrust against them.