The lawsuit seeks to upend a major part of Apple’s business.

The US Department of Justice and 16 state and district attorneys general accused Apple of operating an illegal monopoly in the smartphone market in a new antitrust lawsuit. The DOJ and states are accusing Apple of driving up prices for consumers and developers at the expense of making users more reliant on its iPhones.

  • NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.worldEnglish
    262·
    9 months ago

    We all know that these accusations are true.

    So much so that I need to ask: is it really illegal to do all these things?

    • SkyNTP@lemmy.mlEnglish
      181·
      9 months ago

      Smarter Americans in that past recognized that freedom, including the free market, doesn’t just happen of its own accord, that it has to be defended, legislated. That is how antitrust laws came to be in arguably the most capitalist nation on earth.

      Apathetic Americans now have lost sight of the importance of protecting their freedoms.

      “Illegal” is not just some hypothetical moral absolute. It is the politics of defending one’s values. Americans clearly no longer value either their freedoms or the free market.

    • AA5B@lemmy.worldEnglish
      6·
      9 months ago

      No, these are not illegal activities until you add “as a monopoly”. Antitrust laws are fine with all sorts of behavior as part of competition but not when you dominate a market and it keeps new competitors out

      Everything here will hinge on whether Apple is a monopoly in the markets of concern. I’m sure there are legal definitions and precedents for that.

    • popcap200@lemmy.mlEnglish
      82·
      9 months ago

      The EU said so, and the US did successfully sue valve for monopoly practices.

      • Kedly@lemm.eeEnglish
        3·
        9 months ago

        Except it wasnt successful since its still in the court, and Valve has counter sued for the lawsuit “abuse(ing) the legal process and interfer(ing) with Valve’s relationships with its customers”

        • popcap200@lemmy.mlEnglish
          2·
          9 months ago

          Oh lol my b. I saw the ads for being eligible for compensation and thought they lost.

      • AA5B@lemmy.worldEnglish
        3·
        9 months ago

        EU decisions carry no legal weight in US, and I’m sure the laws are very different. Maybe it signals opportunity and regulator opinion but they’re completely independent decisions

    • horsey@lemm.eeEnglish
      59·
      9 months ago

      I’ve wondered that in the past when people say Apple has a monopoly - there seems to be choice in the market. One can function fine with an Android phone. But people have said “they have a monopoly on iPhones” which doesn’t make much sense to me. Of course they do, but that’s not the same as a monopoly on mobile phones. Also having a monopoly isn’t illegal, only abusing it is. It’s not legal to have a successful proprietary product?

      • NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.worldEnglish
        52·
        9 months ago

        I’ve wondered that in the past

        Well, now you have your answers here in all detail, but it seems you didn’t read them.

        • horsey@lemm.eeEnglish
          3·
          9 months ago

          I didn’t say I was wondering now. I said I was wondering in the past. In any event, i expect to find out from the court case, not online comments from people who probably lack expertise in antitrust law and are not attorneys.

        • AA5B@lemmy.worldEnglish
          3·
          9 months ago

          I also wonder the same, and wish you’d point to those answers, but I think that’s what this whole thing is : a day in court to establish those answers