.png "back to home page")
Remember when Apple hijacked your phone number, forced you onto its messaging platform unwittingly and then penalized you if you left? Hoping there's a case like this brewing on iMessage https://t.co/m25V8TQEMg
— Joshua Topolsky (@joshuatopolsky) May 13, 2019
BREAKING: US Supreme Court allows iPhone customers to sue Apple for alleged App Store monopolization https://t.co/mphSogct9d
— kadhim (＾ｰ^)ノ (@kadhimshubber) May 13, 2019
The $AAPL case split President Donald Trump’s two nominees to the Supreme Court: Gorsuch & Kavanaugh - @tuckerhiggins https://t.co/Iq8pox3f2v
— Christine Wang (@christiiineeee) May 13, 2019
This is just a fascinating issue. At what point should Apple not control how software gets on its own hardware. Security is one of the selling points of the hardware. And there is a giant, ample alternative in Android. https://t.co/0nMxD80qbe
— Brian Fitzgerald ? (@BryFitz) May 13, 2019
KAVANAUGH writes a 5-4 opinion with the Supreme Court’s liberal justices, siding with consumers against Apple.
— Sahil Kapur (@sahilkapur) May 13, 2019
GORSUCH writes the dissent, joined by Roberts, Thomas and Alito.
It’s an antitrust case centered on standing to sue over App Store practices.https://t.co/XTJ2xL9auQ
I don’t get this push to want apps to be made available outside the store. How did it turn out for Fortnite on Android before it was made available in the Play Store? https://t.co/xine7VKb2O
— Carolina Milanesi (@caro_milanesi) May 13, 2019
Apple on Supreme Court ruling: “We’re confident we will prevail when the facts are presented and that the App Store is not a monopoly by any metric.”
— Mark Gurman (@markgurman) May 13, 2019
Add this to the pile of significant legal anticompetitive challenges that Apple faces by their in-app purchase rules.
— Marco Arment (@marcoarment) May 13, 2019
They’ll never allow sideloading or reduce the 30%, but I expect all of this to result in a relaxing of the “can’t even mention other payment methods” rule.
Okay, but an upfront investment was already made. And devs would still have full access to the marketplace of consumers and an opportunity to pay Apple zero. In what other retailer or e-commerce marketplace is that possible?
— John S. Wilson (@JohnWilson) May 13, 2019
BREAKING: SCOTUS ruled that consumers can press ahead with a lawsuit that accuses Apple of using its market dominance to artificially inflate App Store prices
— David S. Joachim (@davidjoachim) May 13, 2019
"Justice Kavanaugh joined the court’s liberal wing in the majority"https://t.co/xNbv6GxgD5 @GregStohr @business pic.twitter.com/AnEDApz7DK
Everyone in Silicon Valley complaining about @ewarren and @chrishughes....
— Kim-Mai Cutler (@kimmaicutler) May 13, 2019
Meanwhile, Kavanaugh!
Maybe Joel Kaplan's move to defend his friend won't be so great for Facebook after all.... https://t.co/qH5lehOY5B
I think Apple has kind of dug it's own grave on this.
— PoliMath (@politicalmath) May 13, 2019
Their argument that users are buying directly from app devs is meaningless when Apple holds tight control over what apps they allow into their store.https://t.co/IyQ4TsQBpn
Brett Kavanaugh wrote the majority opinion that Apple's 30% cut of app revenues raises prices on consumers who can thus sue Apple for having a monopoly on the App Store.
— Dare Obasanjo (@Carnage4Life) May 13, 2019
Didn't think I'd see this happen in the US before the EU. https://t.co/C7NpC3bZyw
I’m no lawyer, but two things have been obvious to me:
— Marco Arment (@marcoarment) May 13, 2019
- Customers absolutely buy apps from Apple, not developers.
- Apple’s requirement that all in-app transactions go through their system (which takes 30%) is anticompetitive, and should absolutely be challenged by regulators. https://t.co/XdsnUlAFG4
"Apple's line-drawing does not make a lot of sense, other than as a way to gerrymander Apple out of this and similar lawsuits," Kavanaugh wrote. https://t.co/o3TCyVhR2s
— Tucker Higgins (@tuckerhiggins) May 13, 2019
Could be forced to do a lot more, c.f. Microsoft having to un-bundle IE; Apple could be compelled to not only allow other app stores but actually provide a startup alert to invite you to pick an alternate one.
— Michael Love (@elkmovie) May 13, 2019
“If accepted, Apple’s theory would provide a roadmap for monopolistic retailers to structure transactions w/ manufacturers or suppliers so as to evade antitrust claims by consumers & thereby thwart effective antitrust enforcement,” Justice Kavanaugh wrotehttps://t.co/2TtOx5dXTI
— Tripp Mickle (@trippmickle) May 13, 2019
Today’s 5-4 antitrust victory for consumers suing Apple directly for jacked-up app prices makes eminent sense. Kavanaugh joined the four liberals; Gorsuch joined the CJ and Thomas and Alito. https://t.co/g2YFlRC8yV
— Laurence Tribe (@tribelaw) May 13, 2019
APPLE: "Developers set the price they want to charge for their app and Apple has no role in that. The vast majority of apps on the App Store are free and Apple gets nothing from them." https://t.co/jdIJkwvXBo
— kif (@kifleswing) May 13, 2019
That’s why I see them relaxing the can’t-mention-other-payment-methods rule instead.
— Marco Arment (@marcoarment) May 13, 2019
If it looks like regulators/DOJ/EU are about to intervene in bigger ways, they’ll likely make that smaller change to fix the biggest problem and avoid heavier-handed changes to the App Store. https://t.co/KsU03HLrfa
If antitrust rulings against Apple are finally what it takes to bring Gatekeeper to iOS, then so be it. It is crazy that non-developer users pay for $100 developer accounts just to sideload apps
— Steve Troughton-Smith (@stroughtonsmith) May 13, 2019
- Supreme Court says Apple has to face consumer lawsuit over App Store monopoly pricing
— nilay patel (@reckless) May 13, 2019
- Decision written by Kavanaugh who sided with 4 liberals on court, further underlining conservative fault lines revealed by antitrust https://t.co/OMQRgXxcn8
They could actually compete.
— Marco Arment (@marcoarment) May 13, 2019
Apple’s IAP system would still be the easiest for most users, and easy payments equal more purchases.
They’d have to earn their 30% on their merits, or reduce it to a percentage that’s more commensurate with the value they’re providing. https://t.co/jiW0ywGGYM
So, can I sue Microsoft for monopolizing games on the xbox?
— Jeff Needles (@jsneedles) May 13, 2019
Can I sue credit card processors for taking a fee for providing a service and therefore potentially increasing the prices people charge?
Where does it end?https://t.co/wimXsAOGOp
Reading this Kavanaugh opinion about Apple and monopoly App Store pricing reveals:
— nilay patel (@reckless) May 13, 2019
1. Kav writes like a truck
2. He thinks Apple's arguments are dumb pic.twitter.com/ogvWjR7uea
Strange bedfellows - Kavanaugh joins with liberal justices to allow App Store lawsuit to proceed https://t.co/DaqLu36dPI
— Scott Kupor (@skupor) May 13, 2019
Big development. I'd expect Apple to keep fighting this hard, but Apple has work arounds here that aren't just lowering the 30%. https://t.co/74cmhvgtW4
— Ben Bajarin (@BenBajarin) May 13, 2019
A Big Tech anti-trust case to watch. Tech titans argue they need expansive market control to provide secure products. App Store far safer than Google Play. Note @nick_clegg’s defense of keeping Facebook intact. Partly to marshall massive resources for product safety and security. https://t.co/lPjbOOXlbm
— David Carroll ? (@profcarroll) May 13, 2019
The Supreme Court ruled consumers can proceed with an antitrust lawsuit against Apple alleging they pay inflated prices because the company requires all phone software be bought and sold through its App Store https://t.co/Bf745dgVBj via @WSJ
— Shushanna (@Shushanna_earle) May 13, 2019
Supreme Court Allows Antitrust Suit Against Apple to Proceed https://t.co/bvJzLD4B3a
— George V. Hulme (@georgevhulme) May 13, 2019
This is just a fascinating issue. At what point should Apple not control how software gets on its own hardware. Security is one of the selling points of the hardware. And there is a giant, ample alternative in Android. https://t.co/0nMxD80qbe
— Brian Fitzgerald ? (@BryFitz) May 13, 2019
Supreme Court rules against Apple in App Store monopoly case https://t.co/mwLmSmRQGf by @natalienoell
— ZDNet (@ZDNet) May 13, 2019
Supreme Court rules against @Apple. Apple’s stock was down 5% at the time of writing.
— Carlos C [)-) | Spatial Computing | @ #MRDevDays (@carlosaddsub) May 13, 2019
This threatens Apple’s revenue as it could mean a reduction of its 30% commission on #AppStore sales. #iOS #AppleDevs #MobileApp #mobilegames #gamedev https://t.co/oktddslC9d
Supreme Court rules against Apple allowing an App Store antitrust case to proceed: https://t.co/GxnWIqoJoH
— Sarah Perez (@sarahintampa) May 13, 2019
"Supreme Court rules against Apple allowing an App Store antitrust case to proceed." Apple was not expecting this verdict. Will take years to resolve. Lots of Apple dolls are going to be doing a lot of depositions. https://t.co/Z4rviDjcQj
— Michael Gartenberg (@Gartenberg) May 13, 2019
Apple responds to Supreme Court ruling: "The App Store is not a monopoly by any metric."https://t.co/f1UoGGKnwd pic.twitter.com/2XylWF2Nfb
— The Verge (@verge) May 13, 2019
Big news re: how platforms define and defend themselves: Supreme Court allows lawsuit against App Store to proceed; Apple argued users are buying from developers, developers are Apple's customers; SC disagreed. Next question: Is App Store a monopoly? https://t.co/m9u1wxsSTf
— Tarleton Gillespie (@TarletonG) May 13, 2019
Breaking: Supreme Court says Apple will have to face App Store monopoly lawsuit https://t.co/KElpQyAEsb pic.twitter.com/oaqE4oCNYU
— The Verge (@verge) May 13, 2019
The Supreme Court has rejected Apple’s argument that iOS App Store users aren’t really its customers https://t.co/dFYV4CUvzo via @thedextriarchy
— Lauren Goode (@LaurenGoode) May 13, 2019
"The Supreme Court is letting an antitrust lawsuit against Apple proceed — and it’s rejected Apple’s argument that iOS App Store users aren’t really its customers." https://t.co/f6VEInCrwk
— Dan Greene (@Greene_DM) May 13, 2019
Ill tidings for the DeFI camp, SCOTUS upholds App Store users are customers of Apple.
— Bryce "Muad'Dib" Weiner (@BryceWeiner) May 13, 2019
If you create the platform, you own it. https://t.co/jtkEEfhOrc
This seems consequential https://t.co/QNbOa2ZqW5
— Dieter Bohn (@backlon) May 13, 2019
Brett Kavanaugh wrote the majority opinion that Apple's 30% cut of app revenues raises prices on consumers who can thus sue Apple for having a monopoly on the App Store.
— Dare Obasanjo (@Carnage4Life) May 13, 2019
Didn't think I'd see this happen in the US before the EU. https://t.co/C7NpC3bZyw
미국 대법윈과 한국 대법원.
— Byungtae Lee (@LotusCreekKR) May 14, 2019
대부분의 규제를 합헌이라고 판결하고 회사가 망해도 노조편만 드는 한국 대법원과 미국의 차이가 한국 경제를 질식시키는 이유 중에 하나다. https://t.co/7AuhKvhPxj
iPhoneアプリ独占販売、独禁法違反で消費者はアップルを訴えることができると米最高裁。Wall Street Journalが報じる。https://t.co/fhTry8pG20
— 引野剛司（Takeshi Hikino) (@WaeijishoHikino) May 14, 2019
Apple Loses Bid To End App Antitrust Case In Supreme Court - WSJ $AAPLhttps://t.co/kmXGAdVPu1
— LiveSquawk (@LiveSquawk) May 13, 2019
Apple’s App Store is in no way a monopoly. I tired of hearing just a few loud developers complain about splitting revenue. 70% of a curated, safe, protected walled garden is orders of magnitude more than 100% of chaos. https://t.co/ga9wjV3kMr
— Alex Fajkowski (@thefaj) May 13, 2019
애플, 오늘 대법원 판결에 대해 반응하고 '앱스토어는 어떤 기준으로도 독점이 아니다"라고 주장. 또한 앱스토어는 소비자와 개발자 모두에게 가장 안전한 플랫폼이며 개발자들에게 앱의 자체 가격을 정하도록 한다고 말해. 그리고 앱의 대부분이 무료라고 덧붙여. https://t.co/1lpcSKxNCR
— Wan Ki Choi (@wkchoi) May 13, 2019
Today, SCOTUS ruled that consumers who buy apps through the Apple app store are direct purchasers and may seek antitrust relief under well-settled law. https://t.co/yBbKssyzIb
— EFF (@EFF) May 13, 2019
Apple is being sued for its App Store "walled garden".
— Ryan Brown ? (@Toadsanime) May 14, 2019
The results of this case could have huge implications for gaming console's closed platforms:https://t.co/vrCfzFdXEA pic.twitter.com/T7oQdrOpjv
Bad news for intermediaries: The Supreme Court just decided 5-4 that users downloading from the App Store *directly* transact with Apple. But at least we now know how the law sees the structure of platform value chains. Europe laughs in Damages Directive.https://t.co/IQ5InqNHYL
— K Stylianou (@kstylian2) May 13, 2019
Supreme Court says #Apple will have to face #AppStore #monopoly lawsuit https://t.co/AYSNUaqesQ via @Verge
— Paul Nemitz (@PaulNemitz) May 14, 2019
Well this is an interesting turn of events, Apple is getting sued for their walled garden approach. This could actually have implications for any device that does this, like game consoles. https://t.co/fvVp7sfPvA
— Spawn Wave (@SpawnWaveMedia) May 13, 2019
Every time I install an app on my Roku from now on I'll think about how Apple believes that act is the legal foundation for it to take a mandatory 30% cut of all app-based digital transactions on iOS.https://t.co/0HQG4QfSM8 pic.twitter.com/3ZsjNGhL47
— Dieter Bohn (@backlon) May 13, 2019