4 ms·
Seems to me that this is more of a monopolistic practice by Apple to be able to extract $26 billion for a default setting.
by fallingknife 3y ago
Seems to me that this is more of a monopolistic practice by Apple to be able to extract $26 billion for a default setting.
- ThrowAwayChris 3y agoUnder what law are apple's actions prosecutable? The problem with this whole mess is that monopoly, monopolization, and monopolistic practices were not defined by legislation. Legislation in fact provides no definitions whatsoever. The entirety of Section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act is comprised of a single run on sentence. It's all well and good to be all "it's Mabo, it's justice, it's the vibe" over this, but congress hasn't provided legislation required to regulate competitive markets.
- chargingmarmot 3y agoThe issue with the Sherman Act is that it is broad and sweeping and leaves discretion up to the government. So the answer to your question is: monopolization is illegal according to the the Sherman Act, and the power to regulate markets is well within the (extremely broad) scope of existing laws (including the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Clayton Act). https://www.ftc.gov/advice-guidance/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws/antitrust-laws https://www.ftc.gov/advice-guidance/competition-guidance/gui...