3 ms·

So, again, legal precedent is that Apple doesn’t have a monopoly.

• angus-prune 6y ago
  The legal precedent isn't that Apple doesn't have a monopoly. There is no legal precedent on whether Apple has a monopoly. The law is entirely agnostic on whether Apple has a monopoly until it is put to a judge.
  • macintux 6y ago
    There is no legal precedent I’m aware of that you can carve out one company’s products and claim that constitutes a market over which it holds a monopoly, in the presence of an alternative with comparable market share.
  • catgary 6y ago
    Consoles have existed for decades applying similar rules to software distribution, no?
• lenkite 6y ago
  The Second Circuit has defined monopoly power as "the ability ' (1) to price substantially above the competitive level and (2) to persist in doing so for a significant period without erosion by new entry or expansion.' Apple's iOS platform matches both these conditions.
  • macintux 6y ago
    Except iPhones aren’t generally more expensive than phones of similar caliber hardware. Samsung offers phones even more expensive. Apple just doesn’t offer cheap hardware. Does Porsche have monopoly power just because they don’t offer low-end models?
    • lenkite 6y ago
      Porsche doesn't provide an app platform.