nodamage

50 ms·

481.
by nodamage 6y ago
> Microsoft got hit for antitrust because of bundled software. Not quite. Microsoft's antitrust violations involved coercing other companies to bundle IE with their products. In particular: 1. They forced OEMs to ship IE instead o
482.
by nodamage 6y ago
I am not sure why this fallacy continues to be repeated in every Apple thread. Apple currently has 46% US market share [1] and 14% global market share [2]. This is far from monopoly power. By contrast, Microsoft had 95% market share during
483.
by nodamage 6y ago
Yes, that was a separate case from 1994 and they ultimately settled with the DOJ. The browser stuff happened a few years later in 1998.
484.
by nodamage 6y ago
> I gather judges really don't like to impose technical requirements - especially in a fast-moving industry like this. Yes, the court in the Microsoft appeal explicitly said this. > Microsoft was convicted of monopoly abuse by si
485.
by nodamage 6y ago
> But to clarify, Microsoft ultimately won the case on appeal and had the initial ruling against them overturned.[1] This is an oversimplification of the appeal, as while the penalty against Microsoft was overturned, the appeals court di
486.
by nodamage 6y ago
This quote is relevant: The problem for Epic — and, I suppose, for me — is that to this observer it seems exceedingly likely that Apple is going to win this case, last night’s decision notwithstanding. Current Supreme Court jurisprudence i
487.
by nodamage 6y ago
As far as I am aware Steam does not need administrator privileges to install third-party games. I am not sure about Epic Game Store.
488.
by nodamage 6y ago
Companies are free to set their own prices. Setting a price that matches your competitor's price is a standard business practice and is not considered price fixing as long as there was no coordination with the competitor. In other word
489.
by nodamage 6y ago
I think you've misunderstood the point. Do you think if Apple permitted apps to be physically sold in stores, but still took their 30% and required apps to be approved, that everyone would be happy?
490.
by nodamage 6y ago
To be honest, it seems like a really bad idea to give third-party app installers root access to your phone though...
491.
by nodamage 6y ago
Another key quote: "Epic brings ten claims for violations of Sherman Act, the California Cartwright Act, and California Unfair Competition. Based on a review of the current limited record before the Court, the Court cannot conclude tha
492.
by nodamage 6y ago
Just because you can download and run software doesn't mean you have the legal right to use it. The right to use software is granted via an end user license agreement, and that right can be revoked. In other words, it's a legal re
493.
by nodamage 6y ago
The term in the contract they breached (not sneaking hidden code past app review) is not the same as the term they are contending is illegal though.
494.
by nodamage 6y ago
Can you cite a source for this claim and provide an example of a game that was physically distributed in stores without the publisher having a signed publishing agreement with Microsoft?
495.
by nodamage 6y ago
They take 30% as well.
496.
by nodamage 6y ago
> The definition of anti trust is to use your position in one market to gain an unfair advantage in an other market. Your definition is missing a key point, which is you have to possess sufficient market power in the primary market in or
497.
by nodamage 6y ago
What argument is that? If the problem is Apple doesn't allow you to sell apps without going through their approval process, Microsoft does the same. If the problem is Apple doesn't allow you to sell apps without collecting a commi
498.
by nodamage 6y ago
> Microsoft lost their case because they ABUSED of their dominant position, that's exactly what Apple is doing in the iOS market Microsoft used their monopoly power in the operating system market to forcibly acquire market share in
499.
by nodamage 6y ago
Except you can't get your game on the shelf without Microsoft's explicit (contractual) approval, and (of course) paying them a royalty for each copy sold.
500.
by nodamage 6y ago
Market power is a specific term used in economics relating to how much control a company has over the price of a good or service. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_power ) It does not have anything to do with stock
501.
by nodamage 6y ago
Microsoft had 90% market share in the operating system market and that is why they lost their case. Apple has less than 50% market share in the United States and it's unlikely the courts would view them as having monopoly power. The ca
502.
by nodamage 6y ago
They already had standing from the $300 million Apple collected in IAP fees, so they didn't need to actually break the contract to file their lawsuit.
503.
by nodamage 6y ago
Fair enough, my comment was intended for people who were unfamiliar with the case and might misinterpret it to apply here.
504.
by nodamage 6y ago
Do you think that a court will permit a plaintiff to claim Apple has a "monopoly" over app distribution without an examination of its market power in the greater smartphone market? Keep in mind that even if Apple only had 1% marke
505.
by nodamage 6y ago
I wasn't actually talking about Epic's lawsuit. But since you mentioned it, I'm not really sure that Epic will succeed with their argument that the "iOS App Distribution" market is the relevant tying product market
506.
by nodamage 6y ago
Both are relevant, because in order to successfully win an antitrust tying claim under US law you need to prove the seller had sufficient market power in a tying product in order to coerce buyers into buying the tied product. In this case,
507.
by nodamage 6y ago
Wouldn't an antitrust claim against Apple likely fail if the plaintiff cannot establish they actually have market power in the smartphone market?
508.
by nodamage 6y ago
The key point in the Kodak case was that Kodak changed their policy on selling repair parts after people bought the original product, and the change in policy is what led the Supreme Court to decide that the market for repair parts was a
509.
by nodamage 6y ago
You bought your iPhone before 2008 and are still using it? If so, I'm impressed. Otherwise, Apple has been clear since the very beginning of the App Store that third-party apps require approval and can only be installed via the App Sto
510.
by nodamage 6y ago
> Market power is the ability to coerce people into paying more for something via a mechanism other than actually offering a better product or service. How exactly does Apple "coerce people into paying more for their phones via a me

More ›