> The suit alleges that the company has a monopoly in the premium smartphone market and uses a variety of illegal tactics to perpetuate that monopoly. > Leavin

> The suit alleges that the company has a monopoly in the premium smartphone market and uses a variety of illegal tactics to perpetuate that monopoly. > Leaving aside the details of those tactics and their legality... Before the iPod, Apple had a monopoly in nothing. That was translated to the iPhone and building a closed ecosystem around it with engineered incompatibilities. It was mostly these tactics of questionable legality that leads to the situation at hand. It's one thing to deal with a current monopoly and see to break it up. But recognizing how that happened and preventing the means of becoming and maintaining a monopoly should be dealt with directly, rather than dealing with the consequences (of allowing the tactics) in each case.