The judge found that Apple is not a monopoly _in the market for payment processors for mobile games_, not that Apple is categorically not a monopoly. > “The r

The judge found that Apple is not a monopoly _in the market for payment processors for mobile games_, not that Apple is categorically not a monopoly. > “The relevant market here is digital mobile gaming transactions, not gaming generally and not Apple’s own internal operating systems related to the App Store,” Gonzalez-Rogers wrote. > Under that market definition, “the court cannot ultimately conclude that Apple is a monopolist under either federal or state antitrust laws,” she continued. My main point of surprise is that anti-trust was even relevant in a lawsuit between two private parties. I thought this would only be relevant if the state were trying an anti-trust case.