Apple sued by DOJ and 16 states for abusing Monopoly power

[MrSquished]

Finally. This has been long due. I think most people get it but some people completely poo pooed what Apple does in the smartphone space.

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/03/21/doj-sues-apple-over-iphone-monopoly.html

The Department of Justice sued Apple on Thursday, saying its iPhone ecosystem is a monopoly that drove its “astronomical valuation” at the expense of consumers, developers and rival phone makers.

The government has not ruled out breaking up one of the largest companies in the world, with a Justice Department official saying on a briefing call that structural relief was on the table if the U.S. were to win.


The lawsuit claims Apple’s anti-competitive practices extend beyond the iPhone and Apple Watch businesses, citing Apple’s advertising, browser, FaceTime and news offerings.

“Each step in Apple’s course of conduct built and reinforced the moat around its smartphone monopoly,” according to the suit, filed by the DOJ and 16 attorneys general in New Jersey federal court.

Apple shares fell more than 4% during trading Thursday. A breakup of Apple if successful would be one of only a handful of breakups under the Sherman Act. The DOJ has considered using it in other antitrust cases, but has not done so since the breakup of the Bell System in 1982.

The Justice Department said in a release that to keep consumers buying iPhones, Apple moved to block cross-platform messaging apps, limited third-party wallet and smartwatch compatibility, and disrupted non-App Store programs and cloud streaming services.

The challenge represents a significant risk to Apple’s walled-garden business model. The company says that complying with regulations costs it money, could prevent it from introducing new products or services, and could hurt customer demand.

 

[BoomerD]

I’m not an Apple fan, (love my iPad though) but I don’t understand how Apple can be forced to allow apps to be sold via their App Store…and if they do, how anyone else can determine their “commission” for the apps sold.

 

[dullard]

I’m not an Apple fan, (love my iPad though) but I don’t understand how Apple can be forced to allow apps to be sold via their App Store…and if they do, how anyone else can determine their “commission” for the apps sold.

Look up "monopoly tying". If you have a monopoly in a particular category or even a specific desired item, then by law you cannot force your customers to buy anything else tied to that item. https://www.ftc.gov/advice-guidance...s/single-firm-conduct/tying-sale-two-products

It is related to the Microsoft anti-trust case. Microsoft had a monopoly on operating systems. Yes, Linux, Apple, and similar variants existed back then, but if you wanted to run specific important software you were basically forced into Microsoft software. The monopoly is allowed on the surface. But then, Microsoft could not use that monopoly to force other things: like tying in the requirement to use Internet Explorer.

It would be like Ford requiring customers to only buy Ford brand gas at Ford dealerships. No one wants that. It would be expensive for you as Ford controls all gas, it would be inconvenient for many as there are no Ford dealerships near them, all other gas stations go out of business, etc. Now, Ford isn't a monopoly so they can't realistically try. But what if Ford was a monopoly?

The argument that Apple is or is not a monopoly is where things get more into grey areas. If you need Facetime, then yes, Apple is a monopoly. If you just need a smart phone, then Apple is not a monopoly. So I think that is where the legal battle will be focused. But the 2nd largest company in the world, whos profits are mostly generated by one item (and things tied to that item), would on the surface sound like a monopoly to many. That is, if Apple was a minority and/or didn't abuse power, then how come Apple is the largest company in the field by income and by market cap?

 

[MrSquished]

Apple 100% abuses it's monopoly power with smartphones. Google 100% absolutely abuses their monopoly power with search.

 

[Charmonium]

Apple lost any spark of real innovation with Jobs. They've just been coasting.

 

[pcgeek11]

Excellent!I fuckin hate Apple products.

 

[Shmee]

Apple 100% abuses it's monopoly power with smartphones. Google 100% absolutely abuses their monopoly power with search.

I usually use duck duck go these days for search. That said, I do have a gmail or two I use, and sometimes I use google drive.

My biggest complaint with not just apple, but most phones AND laptops these days, is the lack of easy repair and modularity. It is very important to be able to use standards, and to be able to customize a device with different parts. Far too many laptops use soldered RAM and SSD, and even those that don't are often a pain to open up to work on. I also can't stand that $1000+ phones no longer have expandable storage. How is that an upgrade over the Samsung phone with micro SD card I already have? (S20 FE 5G)

 

[Moonbeam]

I usually use duck duck go these days for search. That said, I do have a gmail or two I use, and sometimes I use google drive.

My biggest complaint with not just apple, but most phones AND laptops these days, is the lack of easy repair and modularity. It is very important to be able to use standards, and to be able to customize a device with different parts. Far too many laptops use soldered RAM and SSD, and even those that don't are often a pain to open up to work on. I also can't stand that $1000+ phones no longer have expandable storage. How is that an upgrade over the Samsung phone with micro SD card I already have? (S20 FE 5G)

My solution to that and to waiting for call backs is to just carry two iphones and a mini ipad.

 

[Shmee]

My solution to that and to waiting for call backs is to just carry two iphones and a mini ipad.

LOL how is that remotely a solution?

 

[BFG10K]

Good, but they also need to go after Microsoft, Meta, Google, Amazon, NV, etc. We can't allow corporations worth more than some countries to run the world. That's bad for customers and for society as a whole.

 

[BoomerD]

Look up "monopoly tying". If you have a monopoly in a particular category or even a specific desired item, then by law you cannot force your customers to buy anything else tied to that item. https://www.ftc.gov/advice-guidance...s/single-firm-conduct/tying-sale-two-products

It is related to the Microsoft anti-trust case. Microsoft had a monopoly on operating systems. Yes, Linux, Apple, and similar variants existed back then, but if you wanted to run specific important software you were basically forced into Microsoft software. The monopoly is allowed on the surface. But then, Microsoft could not use that monopoly to force other things: like tying in the requirement to use Internet Explorer.

It would be like Ford requiring customers to only buy Ford brand gas at Ford dealerships. No one wants that. It would be expensive for you as Ford controls all gas, it would be inconvenient for many as there are no Ford dealerships near them, all other gas stations go out of business, etc. Now, Ford isn't a monopoly so they can't realistically try. But what if Ford was a monopoly?

The argument that Apple is or is not a monopoly is where things get more into grey areas. If you need Facetime, then yes, Apple is a monopoly. If you just need a smart phone, then Apple is not a monopoly. So I think that is where the legal battle will be focused. But the 2nd largest company in the world, whos profits are mostly generated by one item (and things tied to that item), would on the surface sound like a monopoly to many. That is, if Apple was a minority and/or didn't abuse power, then how come Apple is the largest company in the field by income and by market cap?

yeah, OK, fine...but the government should NOT be allowed to force Apple to host/sell/give away apps via its app store. (same with Samsung/Android-Google/Microsoft, etc.)

 

[manly]

Good, but they also need to go after Microsoft, Meta, Google, Amazon, NV, etc. We can't allow corporations worth more than some countries to run the world. That's bad for customers and for society as a whole.

This administration is surprisingly antitrust, but it's very difficult to win convictions against corporate giants with equally deep pockets. We've already allowed corporations to consolidate power and wealth, so you're not putting the genie back into the bottle. And the few times the government wins a case, a change in the political winds can undo all that effort. People forget the Clinton DoJ beat Microsoft in court, but once Dubya was elected, the new administration decided there was little enforcement action to require.

That was 23 years ago, and Big Tech is exponentially more powerful today.

 

[MrSquished]

Good, but they also need to go after Microsoft, Meta, Google, Amazon, NV, etc. We can't allow corporations worth more than some countries to run the world. That's bad for customers and for society as a whole.

Agreed. The did sue Google a few years back btw

 

[Moonbeam]

LOL how is that remotely a solution?

Three times the storage or more.

 

[jpiniero]

Apple 100% abuses it's monopoly power with smartphones.

Apple doesn't even have the majority market share in smartphones. Can't see how it can be a monopoly.

 

[darkswordsman17]

Apple did need to be gone after, but this reeks of the US government trying to get Apple to stop iMessage's encryption since they're so focused on RCS (whilst they ignore how the carriers refused to actually support it properly which is why Google also wasn't actually pushing it in the end, because it was effectively handing control of that to them, which none of the tech comopanies wanted). IIRC several politicians talked about doing exactly this even (basically said if Apple doesn't put in back doors they could use the DOJ to go after them).

We'll see how their claims of monopoly power holds up. Its clear Apple is abusing their power, but some of their claims are not going to end up where they want and are likely fueled by companies like Meta that are angry that Apple's dominance prevented them from dominating messaging like they wanted to (which is why they started buying up apps, they were trying to force people to use Facebook, basically they were trying to make WeChat). Consumers would not be better off if that happened, so their arguments there are gonna be hard to make since all the companies (be it Facbeook, Google, or the ISPs) all have been investigated over behaviors that show they are blantaly anti-consumer as well. Which is why I wish they'd have gone for some industry wide penalties.

Similar with iMessage and the green/blue bubble shit, which ignores the explicit benefits that iMessage provides over the cesspit that is messaging apps on Android, be it Google's own 147 attempts, the various built-in apps (which by the way are the only ones Google is going to allow certain security privileges on Android; which those don't tend to be well supported/updated so the reasoning for security seems...wrong), and other issues (telcos support for RCS protocols - telcos were intentionally sabotaging support and had explicitly told Google they won't support privacy and security features when Google was trying to get the industry to adopt it so they could then try to get Apple to be more favorable since Google had no real leverage to try to get Apple to make iMessage compatible with whatever messaging apps Google was pushing at the time). The main problem with iMessage is they didn't make Windows and Android versions so that non-Apple hardware owners could use it). In the Google trial from late last year I think it was revealed that Apple did consider it. Which, that trial is likely why this one is happening because there was a LOT of dirt that came out of it.

There's a lot of aspects about Apple I'd like to see reigned in, but I'm also not sure its going to make anything better (even for non-Apple users). For instance, them trying to force car companies to let them take over the entire dashboard is crazy. But then that probably was going to be better for many people (especially since its possible that could prevent the ridiculous wholesale gathering and selling of people's info that car companies are doing, with no actual user agreement even - car companies have said that simply by choosing to be a passenger in a car is agreeing to it which is absurdity to such a degree, especially considering they're supposed to isolate children's data). They should be passing legislation to then slap these entire industries with for abusing.

For many of this stuff they very likely could be going after multiple companies in these markets/industries, which is why I wonder about the actual motives behind this. And that goes extra for the shenanigans going on with AI and Microsoft (which is trying to dominate AI, and their anti-competitive behavior in gaming, among others).

Apple lost any spark of real innovation with Jobs. They've just been coasting.

Jobs' business methods is exactly what the DOJ is going after. They weren't really innovating much with Jobs either, and most of the moves he initiated (Apple designing its own chips, Apple buying up suppliers, the app store setup) was about locking people even more into Apple, and Apple gaining more control over all Apple products and services.

 

[MrSquished]

Apple doesn't even have the majority market share in smartphones. Can't see how it can be a monopoly.

That's because you are not using the actual definition of monopoly power

Competition And Monopoly: Single-Firm Conduct Under Section 2 Of The Sherman Act : Chapter 1

This is archived content from the U.S. Department of Justice website. The information here may be outdated and links may no longer function. Please contact webmaster@usdoj.gov if you have any questions about the archive site.

www.justice.gov

 

[Kaido]

Apple 100% abuses it's monopoly power with smartphones. Google 100% absolutely abuses their monopoly power with search.

Google paid $26 billion dollars to be the default search engine in 2021, including on Apple devices:

Google paid $26 billion in 2021 to become the default search engine on browsers and phones

The number is a more granular look into how much Google pays partners, including Apple, to be the default search engine on their products.

www.cnbc.com

Apple has less than 30% of the smartphone market:

Smartphone Market Share Worldwide in 2024 [Updated Nov 2024]

As of October 2024, Apple has the biggest smartphone market share worldwide, with 28.38%. It is followed by Samsung, Xiaomi, Vivo, Oppo, and Realme.

www.oberlo.com

Which means Android dominates with a 70.69% market share & accounted for over half (56%) of all smartphone sales worldwide in Q4 of 2023:

iPhone vs. Android User & Revenue Statistics (2026)

In the world of smartphones, the rivalry between Apple and Google has been ongoing for years. Apple offers iPhones with iOS, exclusively available to its smartphones. On the other hand, Android is available on a variety of smartphones from different brands, from budget to premium versions. There...

backlinko.com

Apple's market cap is currently $2.6 trillion:

Apple (AAPL) Market Cap & Net Worth

Current and historical market capitalization for Apple Inc. (AAPL) stock, including annual, quarterly and daily history with a chart and statistics.

stockanalysis.com

Although Microsoft's market cap is $3.19 trillion: (RIP Windows phone, lol)

Microsoft (MSFT) Market Cap & Net Worth

Current and historical market capitalization for Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) stock, including annual, quarterly and daily history with a chart and statistics.

stockanalysis.com

Apple gets a lot of flack for high app store fees, but a lot of people don't realize Google also charges a 30% share of app revenue as well:

Google and Apple app store fees, (+12 other stores) ?

Let's compare fees for some of the biggest app stores.

appradar.com

The 5 main points of the lawsuit are interesting:

Why is the US suing Apple? A ‘monopoly’ vs ‘innovation’ battle

Apple has been accused of monopolising the smartphone market in an antitrust lawsuit. Here is what we know.

www.aljazeera.com

1. Blocking innovative apps
2. Suppressing mobile cloud streaming services
3. Cross-platform messaging apps
4. Diminishing the functionality of non-Apple smartwatches
5. Limiting third-party digital wallets

For me, I like that Apple controls their hardware, software, and security in a central way. I don't have to worry about things being secure or trying to figure out what to use or how to use it. "Just works". I consider the iPhone the toaster of electronics, as opposed to an oven (Android) where you can make anything you want. I like the flexibility & innovation of Android (DeX, foldables, round-faced smart watches, etc.), but I also like the (perceived) security of Apple, plus the convenient ecosystem (ever try to setup an Android with an elderly or tech-illiterate relative?). I just use iMazing to clone my entire phone over to new devices as well, which captures 100% of everything on the phone.

I do miss my Hackintosh days, but now that Apple has moved to the M-chip ARM platform, the DIY option is time-limited for future support. It was a fun project back when I was a broke college student, but the amount of power you can get in even a basic Apple laptop these days rivals those old desktop computers, so the point is kind of moot now. Curious to see what the government does to Apple...

 

[MrSquished]

Google paid $26 billion dollars to be the default search engine in 2021, including on Apple devices:

Google paid $26 billion in 2021 to become the default search engine on browsers and phones

The number is a more granular look into how much Google pays partners, including Apple, to be the default search engine on their products.

www.cnbc.com

Apple has less than 30% of the smartphone market:

Smartphone Market Share Worldwide in 2024 [Updated Nov 2024]

As of October 2024, Apple has the biggest smartphone market share worldwide, with 28.38%. It is followed by Samsung, Xiaomi, Vivo, Oppo, and Realme.

www.oberlo.com

Which means Android dominates with a 70.69% market share & accounted for over half (56%) of all smartphone sales worldwide in Q4 of 2023:

iPhone vs. Android User & Revenue Statistics (2026)

In the world of smartphones, the rivalry between Apple and Google has been ongoing for years. Apple offers iPhones with iOS, exclusively available to its smartphones. On the other hand, Android is available on a variety of smartphones from different brands, from budget to premium versions. There...

backlinko.com

Apple's market cap is currently $2.6 trillion:

Apple (AAPL) Market Cap & Net Worth

Current and historical market capitalization for Apple Inc. (AAPL) stock, including annual, quarterly and daily history with a chart and statistics.

stockanalysis.com

Although Microsoft's market cap is $3.19 trillion: (RIP Windows phone, lol)

Microsoft (MSFT) Market Cap & Net Worth

Current and historical market capitalization for Microsoft Corporation (MSFT) stock, including annual, quarterly and daily history with a chart and statistics.

stockanalysis.com

Apple gets a lot of flack for high app store fees, but a lot of people don't realize Google also charges a 30% share of app revenue as well:

Google and Apple app store fees, (+12 other stores) ?

Let's compare fees for some of the biggest app stores.

appradar.com

The 5 main points of the lawsuit are interesting:

Why is the US suing Apple? A ‘monopoly’ vs ‘innovation’ battle

Apple has been accused of monopolising the smartphone market in an antitrust lawsuit. Here is what we know.

www.aljazeera.com

1. Blocking innovative apps
2. Suppressing mobile cloud streaming services
3. Cross-platform messaging apps
4. Diminishing the functionality of non-Apple smartwatches
5. Limiting third-party digital wallets

For me, I like that Apple controls their hardware, software, and security in a central way. I don't have to worry about things being secure or trying to figure out what to use or how to use it. "Just works". I consider the iPhone the toaster of electronics, as opposed to an oven (Android) where you can make anything you want. I like the flexibility & innovation of Android (DeX, foldables, round-faced smart watches, etc.), but I also like the (perceived) security of Apple, plus the convenient ecosystem (ever try to setup an Android with an elderly or tech-illiterate relative?). I just use iMazing to clone my entire phone over to new devices as well, which captures 100% of everything on the phone.

I do miss my Hackintosh days, but now that Apple has moved to the M-chip ARM platform, the DIY option is time-limited for future support. It was a fun project back when I was a broke college student, but the amount of power you can get in even a basic Apple laptop these days rivals those old desktop computers, so the point is kind of moot now. Curious to see what the government does to Apple...

I'm not sure why you are using worldwide market share of phones since we are talking about the US market. The US DOJ does not have control of the world market, they examine monopoly power here in the US. They are suing Apple here in the US, not globally. Those worldwide numbers are totally irrelevant.

Microsoft and Google have been sued by the DOJ - Microsoft in 2000 and Google more recently. I realize you are trying to defend Apple here because you like their control and listing off these other companies like they are getting away scot-free - but you are using the wrong information.

The fact is Apple has abused it's market share of the smartphone industry and consumers have overpaid and missed out on features. I don't know why you want to support that, but you do you.

 

[jpiniero]

That's because you are not using the actual definition of monopoly power

Competition And Monopoly: Single-Firm Conduct Under Section 2 Of The Sherman Act : Chapter 1

This is archived content from the U.S. Department of Justice website. The information here may be outdated and links may no longer function. Please contact webmaster@usdoj.gov if you have any questions about the archive site.

www.justice.gov

Can't see how you can have "monopoly power" without... y'know... having the majority of market share.

When Microsoft got sued, that was a much easier argument. IE had like 95-98% market share then.

Edit: You could make a better argument that Google giving away Android was anticompetitive, since it meant that everyone other than Apple was toast.

 

[manly]

Apple has over 50% of market share of smartphones in the U.S.; I've even seen numbers north of 60% which is wild considering they have the highest ASP in the industry. They capture nearly all of industry hardware profits.

The argument of "but wait, Google is a monopolist" doesn't absolve Apple of its plethora of consumer-unfriendly actions. But the DoJ will have a difficult time winning a very long court battle, if it goes that far. It's not illegal to have a monopoly under U.S. law; it's only illegal to abuse that monopoly.

Lest people forget, Microsoft played extremely dirty in the 1990s; Bill Gates was a ruthless CEO par excellence. For all its warts, Apple isn't quite as shady and really doesn't have the same type of industry clout as Microsoft once did or that Google has in search. Apple will lean very heavily on plausible deniability, i.e. their walled garden is a security feature, not to exert market dominance.

Big Tech is so dominant now that you don't have just one desktop OS monopoly, but many different ones.

 

[MrSquished]

Can't see how you can have "monopoly power" without... y'know... having the majority of market share.

When Microsoft got sued, that was a much easier argument. IE had like 95-98% market share then.

Edit: You could make a better argument that Google giving away Android was anticompetitive, since it meant that everyone other than Apple was toast.

That's a long way to say you didn't read the definition of monopoly power that was helpfully provided via a link direct to the department of justice.

 

[MrSquished]

Who could be right here about abusing market power while using the words monopoly ? The Department of Justice, which has also sued Apple competitors, or Apple fanboys? Gee I wonder. I'm not making up the words here or doing the suing.

Do these Apple fanboys think the US DOJ is wrong in doing this? How so? and is this a Google/Microsoft conspiracy maybe? Please tell us.

 

[jpiniero]

and is this a Google/Microsoft conspiracy maybe? Please tell us.

If you want an real answer as to why... because the Democrats are afraid that Big Tech is going be the end of their "media partners" influence.

 

[MrSquished]

If you want an real answer as to why... because the Democrats are afraid that Big Tech is going be the end of their "media partners" influence.

Oh here we go, an even better conspiracy theory than I thought. A right wing loon one. The best in the business.

I appreciate you letting us know your brain is broken.