4 ms·

It's not ridiculous, but it's also not compatible with the principles of free markets that are in force in Canada and the USA at this time. Apple is not a mono

It's not ridiculous, but it's also not compatible with the principles of free markets that are in force in Canada and the USA at this time. Apple is not a monopoly. It has a monopoly over those who choose to be its customers and those who choose to be its developers, but that is no different than saying that Levis has a monopoly over the black jeans that Steve Jobs wears. Things become different when someone can show that Apple has a monopoly position over an entire market, or that Apple's product or service is an essential product or service. For example, although there is plenty of competition amongst landlords for apartments, most jurisdictions have specific laws that limit the enforceable provisions of a lease. At this moment in time, I don't personally see Apple enjoying a monopoly position in its market, not do I see video player applications as an essential good or service.

lwhi 16y ago
It's not ridiculous, but it's also not compatible with the principles of free markets that are in force in Canada and the USA at this time. I agree, regulation has traditionally been put in place to deal with the creation of monopolies. Personally - I think the question of whether Apple's AppStore constitutes a monopoly is a grey area. They are the only company authorised to sell applications developed for iOS. Supporters of Apple's current policy would argue that other application platforms are available. To this, I would offer the counter-argument that prior investment (time/money/effort) encourages developers and customers to stick with (and put up with) most rules Apple decides to enforce. Choice is (theoretically) available, but many developers and users will be placed in a situation where there they aren't. -- These IP-marketplaces are new - and, as with most things that are digitally-based, a great deal of power is available to whoever is in charge. More power, provides more scope for abuse. I think that some kind of regulation - either through new legislation or a regulatory body needs to be provided. -- Lastly - as Apple isn't providing a free-market to those who sell through it's AppStore, isn't it a little ironic that a desire for free-market economics is provided as a reason against regulation?
- Anechoic 16y ago
  I think the question of whether Apple's AppStore constitutes a monopoly is a grey area. Not even close to a grey area unless you want to argue that Nike has a monopoly on athletic shoes that have the Nike 'swoosh.' To this, I would offer the counter-argument that prior investment (time/money/effort) encourages developers and customers to stick with (and put up with) most rules Apple decides to enforce. Choice is (theoretically) available, but many developers and users will be placed in a situation where there they aren't. How is that different from pretty much every other market where some business decides to create a product that relies on another business' product?
  - lwhi 16y ago
    Not even close to a grey area unless you want to argue that Nike has a monopoly on athletic shoes that have the Nike 'swoosh.' In what way is Nike's swoosh comparable to Apple's AppStore? I think the situation is much more complex; we're talking about a privately regulated marketplace within the free-market. -- How is that different from pretty much every other market where some business decides to create a product that relies on another business' product? A single company can be in complete control of a marketplace - this isn't so possible in non-digital market without help from an organisation like the Mafia.
    - ghshephard 16y ago
      There is no difference (in this context) between a digital and non-digital market. Apple provides a curated store to sell apps for their IOS devices. Their market, so they get to chose the rules. If you wanted to go sell products in Costco, or Walmart, you would have to play by their rules. If you, as a developer, or user, don't like those rules, then thankfully we have superb open source operating systems, such as Linux, and OpenBSD that give you almost 100% freedom to build, sell, and use the applications of your choice. In fact, if you have a jail-broken IOS device, then you can even purchase apps for those devices from places other than Apple's curated store. The Droid, RIM, and WP7 platforms also provide varying degrees of freedom. If, in fact, Apple had a defacto monopoly, then their behavior might come under some form of legislative oversight - but, they certainly don't have a Monopoly on the mobile computing platform, and we really don't need some external body providing regulatory oversight as to what/how Apple should approve applications landing in the store.
- sigzero 16y ago
  Thanks, you answered better than I could. I used "ridiculous" and that was not quite the right word.
  - lwhi 16y ago
    touché ;)
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]

lwhi 16y ago

It's not ridiculous, but it's also not compatible with the principles of free markets that are in force in Canada and the USA at this time. I agree, regulation has traditionally been put in place to deal with the creation of monopolies. Personally - I think the question of whether Apple's AppStore constitutes a monopoly is a grey area. They are the only company authorised to sell applications developed for iOS. Supporters of Apple's current policy would argue that other application platforms are available. To this, I would offer the counter-argument that prior investment (time/money/effort) encourages developers and customers to stick with (and put up with) most rules Apple decides to enforce. Choice is (theoretically) available, but many developers and users will be placed in a situation where there they aren't. -- These IP-marketplaces are new - and, as with most things that are digitally-based, a great deal of power is available to whoever is in charge. More power, provides more scope for abuse. I think that some kind of regulation - either through new legislation or a regulatory body needs to be provided. -- Lastly - as Apple isn't providing a free-market to those who sell through it's AppStore, isn't it a little ironic that a desire for free-market economics is provided as a reason against regulation?

Anechoic 16y ago
I think the question of whether Apple's AppStore constitutes a monopoly is a grey area. Not even close to a grey area unless you want to argue that Nike has a monopoly on athletic shoes that have the Nike 'swoosh.' To this, I would offer the counter-argument that prior investment (time/money/effort) encourages developers and customers to stick with (and put up with) most rules Apple decides to enforce. Choice is (theoretically) available, but many developers and users will be placed in a situation where there they aren't. How is that different from pretty much every other market where some business decides to create a product that relies on another business' product?
- lwhi 16y ago
  Not even close to a grey area unless you want to argue that Nike has a monopoly on athletic shoes that have the Nike 'swoosh.' In what way is Nike's swoosh comparable to Apple's AppStore? I think the situation is much more complex; we're talking about a privately regulated marketplace within the free-market. -- How is that different from pretty much every other market where some business decides to create a product that relies on another business' product? A single company can be in complete control of a marketplace - this isn't so possible in non-digital market without help from an organisation like the Mafia.
  - ghshephard 16y ago
    There is no difference (in this context) between a digital and non-digital market. Apple provides a curated store to sell apps for their IOS devices. Their market, so they get to chose the rules. If you wanted to go sell products in Costco, or Walmart, you would have to play by their rules. If you, as a developer, or user, don't like those rules, then thankfully we have superb open source operating systems, such as Linux, and OpenBSD that give you almost 100% freedom to build, sell, and use the applications of your choice. In fact, if you have a jail-broken IOS device, then you can even purchase apps for those devices from places other than Apple's curated store. The Droid, RIM, and WP7 platforms also provide varying degrees of freedom. If, in fact, Apple had a defacto monopoly, then their behavior might come under some form of legislative oversight - but, they certainly don't have a Monopoly on the mobile computing platform, and we really don't need some external body providing regulatory oversight as to what/how Apple should approve applications landing in the store.
sigzero 16y ago
Thanks, you answered better than I could. I used "ridiculous" and that was not quite the right word.
- lwhi 16y ago
  touché ;)

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]