No, they were correct and you are not. The cases are fundamentally different, and rest on the actions the two companies took. Google actively harmed other sto

No, they were correct and you are not. The cases are fundamentally different, and rest on the actions the two companies took. Google actively harmed other stores. Apple has no other store to harm. In the Google case, epic was able to prove anticompetitive behaviour. In the Apple case they could not prove anything outside of anti steering. The judge doesn’t even need to factor in to the case at the point that Epic failed in the Apple case. They would have failed with any judge because their case was weakened by the lack of anti competition actions