4 ms·

That’s competing. Fair play unless you’re the dominant player in the relevant market.

maxerickson 7y ago
Leveraging their status as the controller of the platform to require support for their solution is not the same thing as their solution competing head to head with other solutions. Note that I'm not making an argument about how to classify the behavior legally, I'm arguing that calling it "competing" is pretty generous.
summerlight 7y ago
The trouble here is the definition of "market". Apple's ecosystem (which Apple has an absolute control on) doesn't seem to be very safe from being defined as a sole market since there's no viable substitute to the app store for Apple users. For instance, even if Apple decides to increase the app store fee to 50% so its app's prices as well, still consumers don't have much choice since buying a new phone is typically more expensive by order of magnitude than buying an app. This is also a part of Spotify's claim as well and Apple is trying to defend itself for this time unlike Apple v. Pepper.
- nihonde 7y ago
  You can’t define Apple’s market as iOS customers unless there are no alternatives to iOS, which there most certainly are.
  - summerlight 7y ago
    I already have explained; there's no alternative to iOS for apple mobile devices unless you're willing to pay more than $500 for an equivalent level of android device. If Apple allows Android to be installed to Apple devices, then things can be different though.
    - xvector 7y ago
      This is true with any industry. There is no alternative from Honda unless you are willing to spend <car-price> on another car.
    - threeseed 7y ago
      Same applies to PlayStation, XBox, Switch, FitBit, Tesla, Thermomix etc. Pretty much the standard.
      - sjwright 7y ago
        In fact software monopolies on hardware isn't pretty much the standard, it's a universal reality in just about all consumer products except one—the personal computer. And even then it's exceedingly rare for a consumer to deviate from the shipped software.
    - nihonde 7y ago
      Are you really going to persist in claiming that Apple has a monopoly on its own products? If so, your grasp of competition rules is fatally flawed.
Mindwipe 7y ago
"Dominant player" isn't especially relevant in European market law. Essentially the test is that you are of sufficient import to materially affect pricing in that market, which Apple definitely is.
- nihonde 7y ago
  I was taught that Article 102 is the test for abuse of monopoly power in the EU. It actually uses the words “dominant position” if I’m not mistaken. I haven’t studied this since the late 90’s, so I may be out of date...

Leveraging their status as the controller of the platform to require support for their solution is not the same thing as their solution competing head to head with other solutions. Note that I'm not making an argument about how to classify the behavior legally, I'm arguing that calling it "competing" is pretty generous.

summerlight 7y ago

The trouble here is the definition of "market". Apple's ecosystem (which Apple has an absolute control on) doesn't seem to be very safe from being defined as a sole market since there's no viable substitute to the app store for Apple users. For instance, even if Apple decides to increase the app store fee to 50% so its app's prices as well, still consumers don't have much choice since buying a new phone is typically more expensive by order of magnitude than buying an app. This is also a part of Spotify's claim as well and Apple is trying to defend itself for this time unlike Apple v. Pepper.

nihonde 7y ago
You can’t define Apple’s market as iOS customers unless there are no alternatives to iOS, which there most certainly are.
- summerlight 7y ago
  I already have explained; there's no alternative to iOS for apple mobile devices unless you're willing to pay more than $500 for an equivalent level of android device. If Apple allows Android to be installed to Apple devices, then things can be different though.
  - xvector 7y ago
    This is true with any industry. There is no alternative from Honda unless you are willing to spend <car-price> on another car.
  - threeseed 7y ago
    Same applies to PlayStation, XBox, Switch, FitBit, Tesla, Thermomix etc. Pretty much the standard.
    - sjwright 7y ago
      In fact software monopolies on hardware isn't pretty much the standard, it's a universal reality in just about all consumer products except one—the personal computer. And even then it's exceedingly rare for a consumer to deviate from the shipped software.
  - nihonde 7y ago
    Are you really going to persist in claiming that Apple has a monopoly on its own products? If so, your grasp of competition rules is fatally flawed.

Mindwipe 7y ago

"Dominant player" isn't especially relevant in European market law. Essentially the test is that you are of sufficient import to materially affect pricing in that market, which Apple definitely is.

nihonde 7y ago
I was taught that Article 102 is the test for abuse of monopoly power in the EU. It actually uses the words “dominant position” if I’m not mistaken. I haven’t studied this since the late 90’s, so I may be out of date...