6 ms·
Anti-trust also encompasses anti-competitive behavior, such as limiting consumer choice and stifling competition. It's a bit grey since Apple's marketplace is
by legohead 3y ago
Anti-trust also encompasses anti-competitive behavior, such as limiting consumer choice and stifling competition. It's a bit grey since Apple's marketplace is pretty unique. We need actual litigation to bring out clear answers.
- scarface_74 3y agoWe’ve already had it. Ask Epic
- Apocryphon 3y agoRulings change all the time. You just mentioned an incoherent one in the thread about Amazon ebooks. Let's see how this one goes.
- scarface_74 3y agoWhy does everyone act like 2013 is ancient history? https://qz.com/103169/how-apple-tried-to-turn-the-e-book-industry-against-amazon-and-lost https://qz.com/103169/how-apple-tried-to-turn-the-e-book-ind...
- Apocryphon 3y agoNon sequitur
- scarface_74 3y agoSo an article about what happened in the Apple ebooks case is a non sequitur about what happened in the Apple ebooks case? I guess I shouldn’t be surprised since people are ignoring a judges ruling that Apple isn’t a monopoly and saying it’s irrelevant.
- Apocryphon 3y agoJudges are actively ignoring each other’s rulings these days, what matters is the newest case that will ensue, what happened in the case you are citing is basically an eternity as far as legal regimes go.
- scarface_74 3y agoSo did the Epic judge ignore the ruling of another judge where Apple was accused of behaving monopolistic in regards to the App Store?
- Apocryphon 3y agoYes, because if you look at the ruling, she does not actually reference United States v. Apple Inc. (the Amazon ebooks case), meaning it did not factor into her decision in the slightest.
- scarface_74 3y agoThe Amazon book case had to do with collusion between Apple and the book publishers. It had absolutely nothing to do with Apple being a “monopoly”. Unless you somehow think Apple had a monopoly on ebooks.
- Apocryphon 3y agoTherefore, you admit your question "So did the Epic judge ignore the ruling of another judge where Apple was accused of behaving monopolistic in regards to the App Store?" was made in bad faith, empty rhetoric. Also you agree with me that you bring it up was a non sequitur.
- scarface_74 3y agoI asked “So did the Epic judge ignore the ruling of another judge where Apple was accused of behaving monopolistic in regards to the App Store?” And you bought up a completely irrelevant case that the judge ignored. She also ignored the case about Apple Music (the company owned by the Beatles) suing Apple, was that a relevant case too?