> What this comes down to is an argument over money, and what percentage apple should get of that money A lot of things have been litigated in this dispute, th

> What this comes down to is an argument over money, and what percentage apple should get of that money A lot of things have been litigated in this dispute, this is not one of them. What this comes down to is questions about control over iPhones and contents of apps, questions the court was asked to answer were things along the lines of: - Whether Apple can restrict iPhones to only installing software received via Apple. - Whether Apple can control how software installed through their platform collects in app payments. - Whether Apple can control how software installed through their platform informs users about not-in-app ways to pay. ... Not "what cut is appropriate". That wasn't the legal or moral point.