US Escalates Apple Probe - Antitrust: Monopoly power?

[UnknownSouljer]

https://apple.slashdot.org/story/23..._source=feedly1.0mainlinkanon&utm_medium=feed

Original WSJ article (Paywall): https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-escalates-apple-probe-looks-to-involve-antitrust-chief-2fa86ddf

The Justice Department has ramped up work in recent months on drafting a potential antitrust complaint against Apple, WSJ reported Wednesday, citing people familiar with the matter. From the report: The investigation into whether Apple has monopoly power that it abuses began in 2019, but enforcers have escalated their efforts in recent months, with more litigators now assigned to the case and new requests for documents and consultations with companies involved, the people said. The Justice Department's investigation deals in part with Apple's policies governing mobile third-party software on its devices, which has been the focus of much of the criticism targeting Apple's competitive practices. The department is also looking at whether Apple's mobile operating system, iOS, operates in an anticompetitive way by favoring its own products over those of outside developers, the people said.

 

[Flogger23m]

Not much of an article to go off of. I will say if any modern tech company is getting monopolistic, it would probably be Apple. They do a lot more in house design, branding and have a more closed off eco system than any other OS.

I'm not entirely convinced that is a bad thing for Apple/customers though.

 

[Nobu]

IMHO, it's their product, and their store, and their OS. They could just as well close the store and only have their apps on their phone--like it used to be. If it's really a problem, develop apps for Android only and point to Apple when customers complain.

There are much bigger fish to fry when it comes to anti-competitive practices, imo. I bet Apple's ad and privacy policies are what really have their feathers ruffled.

 

[LukeTbk]

Google with search is the only monopoly that came in mind and that one where it would not be obvious that it hurt customer (and it is quite active and not that stagnant innovation wise).

I am not able to get behind the paywall here, but I would be curious in what domain of Apple business there is not a thriving-booming world innovation going on.

There seem to be some political, big tech are too big that not good going on, but I am not sure if they can link to customer being hurt and win those battle.

Not so long ago digital Ads seemed to be a strong duopoly with google-facebook having like 90% of the new revenues, now they are like down to 30% it is an incredibly dynamic marketplace with Uber, Amazon, Netflix, tiktok, disney and many others.

 

[LigTasm]

I feel like this is more of the government not getting all the backdoors they want and now they're going to flex on Apple to try and make them do it.

 

[UnknownSouljer]

Not much of an article to go off of. I will say if any modern tech company is getting monopolistic, it would probably be Apple. They do a lot more in house design, branding and have a more closed off eco system than any other OS.

I didn't link the original WSJ article which is here: https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-escalates-apple-probe-looks-to-involve-antitrust-chief-2fa86ddf
Behind a paywall.

 

[Aurelius]

They might have a case for the App Store, since there's no easy way to put apps on an iPhone if you don't go through the official portal. I've long thought Apple should allow sideloaded apps but require a developer ID (like you can optionally require on a Mac) so that it can revoke access under very limited conditions, like malware or a government request. And before you ask: no, this would still make it easier to avoid censorship in countries like China, since you could use a VPN to prevent any automatic removals.

Now, favoring in-house apps and services... Apple does need to allow changing more defaults, but this is otherwise a tougher case to make.

 

[UnknownSouljer]

They might have a case for the App Store, since there's no easy way to put apps on an iPhone if you don't go through the official portal. I've long thought Apple should allow sideloaded apps but require a developer ID

You can do this now.
https://www.techtarget.com/searchmo...asy-it-is-to-sideload-iOS-apps-to-your-iPhone

There was actually a case where a developer account got revolked because the dev was teaching users how to side load their “special app”. That would’ve been fine, except it didn’t pass App Store scrutiny in the first place because it was full of spyware and also they were using their dev creditials for everyone (rather than each individual getting their own dev account which costs I believe $100 a year or something). Apple simply banned the dev, which revolked the side loaded app on all of those individual user's phones.

If I can find the article I’ll link it. But it was from a while ago. Maybe 2 years or so.

 

[Aurelius]

You can do this now.
https://www.techtarget.com/searchmo...asy-it-is-to-sideload-iOS-apps-to-your-iPhone

There was actually a case where a developer account got revolked because the dev was teaching users how to side load their “special app”. That would’ve been fine, except it didn’t pass App Store scrutiny in the first place because it was full of spyware and also they were using their dev creditials for everyone (rather than each individual getting their own dev account which costs I believe $100 a year or something).

If I can find the article I’ll link it. But it was from a while ago. Maybe 2 years or so.

By easy I mean not having to rely on enterprise/TestFlight distribution or otherwise using loopholes. In my version of things, iOS would just check if an app has a greenlit developer ID and let you grab it.

 

[Lakados]

Honestly, I feel this is a tactic the USGov is using to pressure Apple to bring some of its manufacturing back to the US. Offering tax incentives didn't work so now they bring out the sticks.

 

[Aurelius]

Honestly, I feel this is a tactic the USGov is using to pressure Apple to bring some of its manufacturing back to the US. Offering tax incentives didn't work so now they bring out the sticks.

I'm not so sure. The administration made a big deal of Apple using TSMC's new Arizona facilities for future chips — it's already happy with where things are going. This is more likely part of a general crackdown on Big Tech that also affects Alphabet, Meta and others.

 

[DukenukemX]

I'm not entirely convinced that is a bad thing for Apple/customers though.

Apple consumers... no. Regular consumers? Let me see how the Apple TV works with my Android phone. Well shit, it doesn't.
https://9to5mac.com/2023/01/16/apple-tv-iphone-required/

They might have a case for the App Store, since there's no easy way to put apps on an iPhone if you don't go through the official portal. I've long thought Apple should allow sideloaded apps but require a developer ID (like you can optionally require on a Mac) so that it can revoke access under very limited conditions, like malware or a government request. And before you ask: no, this would still make it easier to avoid censorship in countries like China, since you could use a VPN to prevent any automatic removals.

Now, favoring in-house apps and services... Apple does need to allow changing more defaults, but this is otherwise a tougher case to make.

I will continue to always reference Paramount VS United States where movie theaters were monopolizing movies to certain brand theaters. In 1948 they realized that requiring a service to get you content was anti consumer and literally made it illegal. You can add game consoles to the list as well as streaming services since this is the same practice. You own the hardware and that includes the ability to do whatever you want with it. Apple should give consumers the ability to side load whatever the fuck they want with no restrictions. Apple doesn't because other stores would pop up and try to compete. This also means that Apple would have to focus more on their software and hardware instead of just locking people into their ecosystem. You know it's a problem when some people are afraid to leave Apple cause their friends use AirDrop and Android can't text iOS without issues.

 

[Lakados]

Apple consumers... no. Regular consumers? Let me see how the Apple TV works with my Android phone. Well shit, it doesn't.
https://9to5mac.com/2023/01/16/apple-tv-iphone-required/
View attachment 550101

I will continue to always reference Paramount VS United States where movie theaters were monopolizing movies to certain brand theaters. In 1948 they realized that requiring a service to get you content was anti consumer and literally made it illegal. You can add game consoles to the list as well as streaming services since this is the same practice. You own the hardware and that includes the ability to do whatever you want with it. Apple should give consumers the ability to side load whatever the fuck they want with no restrictions. Apple doesn't because other stores would pop up and try to compete. This also means that Apple would have to focus more on their software and hardware instead of just locking people into their ecosystem. You know it's a problem when some people are afraid to leave Apple cause their friends use AirDrop and Android can't text iOS without issues.
View attachment 550102

Paramount v United States was repealed Aug 2020, and don't get so caught up on RCS and Android, the RCS messaging protocol was designed for one thing and one thing only, marketing.
When the GSMA consortium approached mobile providers to get them to adopt the standard they were pitching it as "The future of text-based marketing" by promoting these functions primarily.

• Branding
• Quick Replies
• Embedded Rich Cards
• Invoicing and Payment Services
• Maps integrations and Location Sharing
• Scheduling integrations

There was nothing in their initial pitches to the major mobile providers about better customer satisfaction or services, it was all about how they could better extract data from users and use that to better fill out the profiles they keep on spending for targeted marketing.

Furthermore, RCS is tied to your phone number, Android routs all messages through a Google server and they scan all content for marketable keywords, they claim not to sell the data but they certainly do use it internally and as a result.

 

[DukenukemX]

Paramount v United States was repealed Aug 2020,

We are screwed.

and don't get so caught up on RCS and Android, the RCS messaging protocol was designed for one thing and one thing only, marketing.
When the GSMA consortium approached mobile providers to get them to adopt the standard they were pitching it as "The future of text-based marketing" by promoting these functions primarily.

• Branding
• Quick Replies
• Embedded Rich Cards
• Invoicing and Payment Services
• Maps integrations and Location Sharing
• Scheduling integrations

There was nothing in their initial pitches to the major mobile providers about better customer satisfaction or services, it was all about how they could better extract data from users and use that to better fill out the profiles they keep on spending for targeted marketing.

I'm just upset that when I get texts from iPhone users that I get low quality images and it takes minutes to receive. I'm not a fan of RCS but I'm mainly talking about regular SMS MMS texting.

Furthermore, RCS is tied to your phone number, Android routs all messages through a Google server and they scan all content for marketable keywords, they claim not to sell the data but they certainly do use it internally and as a result.

In this day in age if I want to communicate I use Discord or whatsapp. I just want Apple to properly support SMS and MMS.

 

[schoolslave]

We are screwed.

I'm just upset that when I get texts from iPhone users that I get low quality images and it takes minutes to receive. I'm not a fan of RCS but I'm mainly talking about regular SMS MMS texting.

In this day and age if I want to communicate I use Discord or whatsapp. I just want Apple to properly support SMS and MMS.

I usually agree with your posts and have a lot of respect for your viewpoints but complaining about Apple while praising data-syphons the likes of discord and WhatsApp is a bit strange.

 

[DukenukemX]

I usually agree with your posts and have a lot of respect for your viewpoints but complaining about Apple while praising data-syphons the likes of discord and WhatsApp is a bit strange.

I'm not praising, just that's what I use. I complain about Google and their practices but in the end I still use Google.com, Gmail and YouTube. There are limits to how far you can fight the man. It's not like I haven't switched to another method of communication a dozen times. AOL messenger, Skype, TeamSpeak, Hangouts, and etc just to name a few. Good luck telling someone to install an app that they don't use to just send a message. Which is why dealing with Apple users are the worst since they expect everyone to own an iPhone. iMessage is just not a thing on Android. If there was a true open source alternative that everyone is using then I'd be on it. Until then I gotta use whatever works.

 

[Lakados]

In this day and age if I want to communicate I use Discord or whatsapp. I just want Apple to properly support SMS and MMS.

SMS and MMS are the only two standards Apple does support. Everything else is proprietary, they are just 30 year old standards that don’t handle modern multimedia particularly well.
RCS does do multimedia better but would require the telecoms to invest in infrastructure which I mean good luck on that.

To further complicate RCS adoption is the fact it is the dogs breakfast in terms of versioning, features, and backwards compatibility. Even google has migrated to its own variant of the RCS protocol because they wanted features not supported by the standard.

There are currently 11 major versions of RCS, 3 enhanced versions, Joyn which was supposed to amalgamate the 11 RCS versions but it’s now on it’s 3’rd major revision, and finally RCS Universal which is on it’s 6’th major revision and was deployed to correct the wrongs of RCS and Joyn.

SMS and MMS are basically unchanged since their introduction and globally supported.

I also want a unified standard for multimedia communication, SMS and MMS are too old, and RCS can’t get its shit together, so we are left waiting for some benevolent 3’rd party to launch something and leave it the hell alone for everybody to adopt.

 

[sleepeeg3]

Google with search is the only monopoly that came in mind and that one where it would not be obvious that it hurt customer (and it is quite active and not that stagnant innovation wise).

Uh... Microsoft? 'lo

• Windows​
• Office​
• Eventually Azure​

Lots of big tech companies that should be trust busted. Capitalism is the best economic driver, but it only functions when there is competition.

 

[madpistol]

I don't get this at all. Android is a completely viable alternative to iOS and highly competitive. Apple does not have a monopoly over anything... and I'm an iPhone/Apple Watch user. Apple just makes a good product and people continue to buy it. People have a choice. Now, if it was "Either you buy iPhone or you're stuck with an OS and devices that are 10 years behind", I could understand that, but Apple develops nearly every part of their devices in house. It's not cheap, but the benefits are a far more cohesive environment where devices are able to talk to each other seamlessly... and SURPRISE!!! People actually like that functionality.

 

[LukeTbk]

Uh... Microsoft? 'lo

• ​

There is much popular alternative to all the listed product no ? Obviously windows with Apple-linux-Chromebook and so on, Office with the Apple, google, openOffice

Could have changed, but in 2016:

I am not sure there is any market that exist where the biggest rivals has 3.x% of the marketshare like Search

 

[Lakados]

I feel like this is more of the government not getting all the backdoors they want and now they're going to flex on Apple to try and make them do it.

Nah, I find it funnier that Google and Facebook make a bunch of campaign contributions and suddenly Apple is being investigated for the very things they recently told Facebook and Google they weren't allowed to do.
Backdooring a device is hard, with too much to go wrong and too small an attack surface, much easier to work the source at a high level and partner up with the ISPs and Telecom providers to have them provide logs, and maybe for special occasions have the ISPs add a "special issue" Certificate Authority to their trusts when they really need to know whats going on.

 

[Lakados]

I don't get this at all. Android is a completely viable alternative to iOS and highly competitive. Apple does not have a monopoly over anything... and I'm an iPhone/Apple Watch user. Apple just makes a good product and people continue to buy it. People have a choice. Now, if it was "Either you buy iPhone or you're stuck with an OS and devices that are 10 years behind", I could understand that, but Apple develops nearly every part of their devices in house. It's not cheap, but the benefits are a far more cohesive environment where devices are able to talk to each other seamlessly... and SURPRISE!!! People actually like that functionality.

The crux of it is Apple's iOS makes up some 30% of the global mobile market, but currently, 70% of all mobile spending goes through the Apple store. Google, Facebook, Paypal, and all the others would be stupid if they didn't get their lobbyists on top of getting access to that cash flow it is an insane amount of money, and if they can even get a small portion of it the effort more than pays for itself.
The funniest part is the places where Apple has been forced to allow for 3'rd party payment systems it is a complete shit show, and developers complain that it ends up being a lot of extra work for a pitiful 4% savings once the other payment processors get their cut and all the necessary accounting is done. Apple is still legally allowed to charge a percentage of the 3'rd party transactions for managing and maintaining the store and its necessary security processes, Epic successfully demonstrated that Apple does charge enough to make a healthy profit but they also made it painfully clear what the costs of maintaining the iOS App store are so Apple is allowed to recoup that amount, leaving the 3'rd party payment processor to close the gap. All it has managed to do is increase problems for consumers while increasing work for the developers for very minor savings. Banks aren't known for their benevolence you think that if they knew you were able to pay 30% and had been doing so for decades they would settle for a substantially smaller amount?

 

[sleepeeg3]

There is much popular alternative to all the listed product no ? Obviously windows with Apple-linux-Chromebook and so on, Office with the Apple, google, openOffice

Could have changed, but in 2016:

I am not sure there is any market that exist where the biggest rivals has 3.x% of the marketshare like Search

Not sure what your graph is showing. Are those users? Industries? Departments? Is it only limited to Office 365? MS monopolizes around 89% of business marketshare. But I am frankly shocked Google office tools are being used by anyone, but individuals.

Google should be busted up for search. Although I personally would argue that as a search engine, Google is fine, but DuckDuckGo works even better with less ads. Switched years ago.
Never thought people would become so attached to one search engine. Back in the day there was Lycos, Altavista, Yahoo!, etc. Too bad I didn't figure it out sooner - I would have made a lot of money on Google's stock.

 

[LukeTbk]

Not sure what your graph is showing. Are those users? Industries? Departments?

Usage by sector.

MS monopolizes around 89% of business marketshare

But has that link say a direct rival has 3 billions users and it is a very dynamic market and if I am not misreading, 21% of office users also use Google Workspace.

There some room to make sure free options packaged does not happen and that files can be openned by the competition and so on, but Office seem to have in google a giant direct competitor, slack-zoom are superb competitor in key aspect of the Office business has well, that I imagine take much more than 3% of the market share in those silo.

As a search engine, Google is fine

And it is not obvious at all that the monopoly hurt the users, they can get away to pay a fortune the Apple of the world to be the default search options on their device. People use it because in many ways it is the best by a good amount and free, not because alternative are not easy to find

 

[GotNoRice]

Of all my mobile and app-based devices, Apple devices are by-far the most restrictive. The number of apps that I'm accustomed to having available on my android devices that are not available on my iOS devices is very annoying. Firefox for example. On Android, I can use Firefox, using the actual Firefox engine, including Firefox addons, etc, no problem. On iOS there is a castrated version of Firefox that is basically just a UI mod of Webkit, because that is all that Apple allows. Of course, no Firefox addons work at all. It is that absolute monopoly that they exert via the Apple app-store that makes this possible. They can simply force things - such as only allowing browsers that use their browser engine, instead of allowing for any actual competition.

The only other device that is somewhat comparable is my Amazon FireHD Tablet. By default, it only comes with the Amazon App Store. These are subsidized tablets that are very cheap, and obviously designed to steer you toward and encourage you to consume Amazon content. The Amazon App Store also has strict restrictions on which browsers you are able to use, etc. Firefox was available on the Amazon app store until a couple years ago until they removed it. BUT, there is one VERY BIG difference between this situation with the Amazon tablet vs the Apple tablet. The Amazon tablet is using a customized version of Android and allows side-loading of apps... I simply side-loaded the Google-Play store and used that to install all of my apps instead of the Amazon store. I can get the full version of Firefox and every other app from the Google Play store that I want. I've set these up for many people as what essentially becomes a very cheap yet fully functional Android tablet at that point.

So I would really love to see Apple slapped around a bit, and forced to open-up their ecosystem to at least some extent. While Google is certainly a monopoly also, their app-store monopoly is more a result of their market-share, while Apple's app-store monopoly is a result of forced software restrictions. Most Android devices can have multiple app stores and allow side-loading (Samsung devices come with Samsung app store also, etc). Meanwhile, when using an Apple device, I feel like I'm operating from within an Apple jail-cell.

 

[Lakados]

Of all my mobile and app-based devices, Apple devices are by-far the most restrictive. The number of apps that I'm accustomed to having available on my android devices that are not available on my iOS devices is very annoying. Firefox for example. On Android, I can use Firefox, using the actual Firefox engine, including Firefox addons, etc, no problem. On iOS there is a castrated version of Firefox that is basically just a UI mod of Webkit, because that is all that Apple allows. Of course, no Firefox addons work at all. It is that absolute monopoly that they exert via the Apple app-store that makes this possible. They can simply force things - such as only allowing browsers that use their browser engine, instead of allowing for any actual competition.

The only other device that is somewhat comparable is my Amazon FireHD Tablet. By default, it only comes with the Amazon App Store. These are subsidized tablets that are very cheap, and obviously designed to steer you toward and encourage you to consume Amazon content. The Amazon App Store also has strict restrictions on which browsers you are able to use, etc. Firefox was available on the Amazon app store until a couple years ago until they removed it. BUT, there is one VERY BIG difference between this situation with the Amazon tablet vs the Apple tablet. The Amazon tablet is using a customized version of Android and allows side-loading of apps... I simply side-loaded the Google-Play store and used that to install all of my apps instead of the Amazon store. I can get the full version of Firefox and every other app from the Google Play store that I want. I've set these up for many people as what essentially becomes a very cheap yet fully functional Android tablet at that point.

So I would really love to see Apple slapped around a bit, and forced to open-up their ecosystem to at least some extent. While Google is certainly a monopoly also, their app-store monopoly is more a result of their market-share, while Apple's app-store monopoly is a result of forced software restrictions. Most Android devices can have multiple app stores and allow side-loading (Samsung devices come with Samsung app store also, etc). Meanwhile, when using an Apple device, I feel like I'm operating from within an Apple jail-cell.

While I agree from a business perspective I have to side with Apple on this.
The first thing I have to do for users who get approved for an Android phone is apply the MDM profiles to kill side loading, disable the 3’rd party stores, and kill most of the Google metric collection then disable the Play store and replace it with a custom one that only lists approved apps.

Apple on the other hand we don’t need to deal with nearly as much. Apple even goes so far as to auto enrol the devices in Business Manager and push things down to the MDM and provides all the tools needed. But we have far fewer security precautions we need to take there.

Ultimately iOS devices are much easier to control and manage in large numbers.

 

[GotNoRice]

While I agree from a business perspective I have to side with Apple on this.
The first thing I have to do for users who get approved for an Android phone is apply the MDM profiles to kill side loading, disable the 3’rd party stores, and kill most of the Google metric collection then disable the Play store and replace it with a custom one that only lists approved apps.

Apple on the other hand we don’t need to deal with nearly as much. Apple even goes so far as to auto enrol the devices in Business Manager and push things down to the MDM and provides all the tools needed. But we have far fewer security precautions we need to take there.

Ultimately iOS devices are much easier to control and manage in large numbers.

Yeah, it makes sense that Apple's ultra-restrictive ecosystem would be convenient from a business perspective. I just don't see why that couldn't be optional, and why that has to be forced on personal users.

Semi off-topic but it reminds me of a friend from years ago. Her main computer was a work laptop (attached to an external monitor, keyboard, and mouse). It was ridiculously locked down. It was set so that the monitor would never turn off, and would instead display a screen-saver with their corporate logo bouncing around the screen constantly. It wouldn't let her change the setting to simply turn off her monitor after 15 minutes. Unsurprisingly her monitor died after about 6 months (older CFL backlight IIRC).

I can also see how extreme limitations on a mobile device can be good for some, where the restrictions essentially amount to "hand-holding". The type that are too stupid not to download malware apps onto their own phone, etc. Maybe an ultra-restrictive ecosystem is actually good for them. It just seems like there should be room for an advanced option to open things up, something that 95% of people would never bother with or even know how to do, but would give enthusiasts the freedom that they want.

 

[Lakados]

Yeah, it makes sense that Apple's ultra-restrictive ecosystem would be convenient from a business perspective. I just don't see why that couldn't be optional, and why that has to be forced on personal users.

Semi off-topic but it reminds me of a friend from years ago. Her main computer was a work laptop (attached to an external monitor, keyboard, and mouse). It was ridiculously locked down. It was set so that the monitor would never turn off, and would instead display a screen-saver with their corporate logo bouncing around the screen constantly. It wouldn't let her change the setting to simply turn off her monitor after 15 minutes. Unsurprisingly her monitor died after about 6 months (older CFL backlight IIRC).

I can also see how extreme limitations on a mobile device can be good for some, where the restrictions essentially amount to "hand-holding". The type that are too stupid not to download malware apps onto their own phone, etc. Maybe an ultra-restrictive ecosystem is actually good for them. It just seems like there should be room for an advanced option to open things up, something that 95% of people would never bother with or even know how to do, but would give enthusiasts the freedom that they want.

But the costs of trying to appease or secure those features for 5% of the user base generally exceeds any revenue they would generate, more cost effective to let them go if it’s a deal breaker.

But yeah I personally would want the features, though ultimately would probably just mess around when I was bored then just go back to the defaults. The only thing I wish to do is move the space bar like 5mm to the right, I constantly hit the ‘.’ Instead of space when typing in a browser search tab, so annoying.

 

[polonyc2]

DOJ close to filing massive antitrust suit against Apple over iPhone dominance

The DOJ could file a lawsuit against Apple within the first six months of this year, the New York Times reported on Friday, citing sources familiar with the matter...the feds are investigating whether Apple has leveraged its various hardware and software products to ensure the iPhone has a dominant hold on the smartphone market

The probe is said to be focused on several specific elements of the Cupertino, Calif.-based company’s business — including whether the Apple Watch performs better when linked to the iPhone versus rival smartphones, whether Apple is improperly limiting competition for its iMessage text service...Antitrust cops are also exploring Apple’s payments system for the iPhone and whether the company unfairly stifles rival services offered by competitors, the report said...

https://nypost.com/2024/01/05/busin...-massive-antitrust-suit-against-apple-report/

 

[DukenukemX]

DOJ close to filing massive antitrust suit against Apple over iPhone dominance

The DOJ could file a lawsuit against Apple within the first six months of this year, the New York Times reported on Friday, citing sources familiar with the matter...the feds are investigating whether Apple has leveraged its various hardware and software products to ensure the iPhone has a dominant hold on the smartphone market

The probe is said to be focused on several specific elements of the Cupertino, Calif.-based company’s business — including whether the Apple Watch performs better when linked to the iPhone versus rival smartphones, whether Apple is improperly limiting competition for its iMessage text service...Antitrust cops are also exploring Apple’s payments system for the iPhone and whether the company unfairly stifles rival services offered by competitors, the report said...

https://nypost.com/2024/01/05/busin...-massive-antitrust-suit-against-apple-report/

Something I'd except the EU to do. Also, isn't this a very old topic?

 

[Lakados]

Something I'd except the EU to do. Also, isn't this a very old topic?

Yeah the DOJ started looking at Apple back in 2019 and managed to do fuck all while spending a crapload of money so they are desperate to pick off some low hanging fruit so it looks like they have actually done something. So the DoJ is going after things other countries have nailed Apple on.

Additionally the DoJ just nailed Google so they have to go after Apple for something so it doesn’t look like they are playing favourites.

 

[paradoxical]

Meanwhile, actual monopolies like broadband providers which literally everyone hate get completely ignored because it is a less sexy target for the DoJ.

 

[toast0]

Meanwhile, actual monopolies like broadband providers which literally everyone hate get completely ignored because it is a less sexy target for the DoJ.

Naw, it's because the FCC declared home internet is a coompetitive marketplace. Consumers have access to cable, dsl, wireless and (*snicker*) powerline. Totally competitive.

Plus, when they do mergers and what not, they carefully divide their territory up so they don't have too much of the country.

Congress addressed this in the 1996 telecom act with mandatory line sharing, but the FCC made it toothless over time.