3 ms·
> I think it's probably within Apple's rights to use their own private APIs. Only if it doesn't provide applications produced by other parts of their company (
by larsberg 16y ago
> I think it's probably within Apple's rights to use their own private APIs.
Only if it doesn't provide applications produced by other parts of their company (say, iBooks) an unfair advantage over other e-Readers on the platform (GoodReader, Kindle, etc.). Otherwise, how is this situation any different from Microsoft's exposure of internal APIs for the Office team that Novell was not aware of? I only ask this question in a structural sense, not legally, as IANAL and there's probably a monopoly position test or two that people could argue about for another 200 comments.
http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/3435371/Novell-Files-WordPerfect-Suit-Against-Microsoft.htm http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/3435371/Nov...
- ugh 16y agoApple has no monopoly on digital book readers or digital books. It doesn’t even have a dominant position in the market. That’s what matters.
- saurik 16y agoThe idea is that they might use a controlling interest in another market (mobile application sales and distribution; despite the fact that Android is or at least will soon be the dominant hardware platform, its application market sucks) in order to gain an unfair advantage in another market (digital books). The fact that Apple is not already leader in digital books is almost a prerequisite to make this claim.
- saurik 16y agoOne difference is that Microsoft may have kept some clumsy APIs undocumented, but fundamentally had no power over distributers with respect to their usage of those same APIs, nor did they ever claim their public development tools were under NDA. Microsoft has a bad rap, but Apple is just downright bad.