Today, Apple has liability for an antitrust law filed by the Ministry of Justice of the United States, and shares the refutation of the claims and defects in the size of trips in outlined complaints.
According to Apple, the lawsuit is supposed to “set up dangerous previous”, which would allow the government to dictate the design and function of technology and threaten the “principles that separate the iPhone” from the addictive devices.
As a recapitulation, Apple has fled an illegal monopoly on the smartphone market in March 2024. To support its accusation, it provides five examples of Apple’s decisions and has locked the consumer to the ecosystem of iphone.
- Great app – It claims that Apple blocks applications that offer “wide functionality”, such as WeChat or applications that offer mini games and other features with multiple applications.
- Cloud streaming – Apple has been charged with suppressing cloud streaming games by preventing them from being in the app store.
- Application for sending messages – DO has a problem with lack of iMessage for Android, Green Bubble vs. Blue Bubble Separation and Apple Delayed RCS Support. It also believes that third -party applications should be able to send and receive SMS messages in the location of Messages.
- Smart watch -Apple is charged with limiting key features from third -party smart watches and prevents iphone users from getting a functionality of similar Apple Watch from a watch with “better user interfaces and services”. He also complained that Apple Watch is not compatible with Android devices.
- Digital wallet – The problem with Apple’s rejection has a problem to allow banking applications and other digital payments providers to access the NFC chip in iphone for payment purposes.
Many claims have been weakened or not long because they have added Apple. For example, with iOS 17.4 Apple eliminated application restrictions and cloud streaming applications offering mini games on iOS and super applications are and have been supported.
Apple has accepted rcs from filing it, which improved the interoperability of messages between Android and iphone, although messages for messages cannot receive in SMS or RCS. Apple opened access to NFC in iOS 18.1 and added support for non -contact NFC payments via third -party payment applications.
Apple doesn’t believe that Apple’s position on the market. It uses returned as its metric to calculate the market share instead of the Dirty unit, which Apple says it is “disproportionate”. It also suggested that “power smartphones” are a separate category from standard smartphones, although it is not a category of recognized devices. Apple also claims that US figures are not an accurate reflection of the global competition they face.
Apple points out that this has led to an action by the Ministry of Justice, not from customers iphone, but rather from a small number of developers who have become “some of the large and best Apple compartors”. Apple claims that fulfillment of the application would get the experience of the consumer iphone.
Antimonopoly laws on Apple do not store Doty to propose their own product in a way that would better suit its opponents at the expense of consumers whose equipment could be less safe, less private and less intuitive.
Ultimately, this case does not apply to millions of satisfied iPhone users or even hundreds of thousands of iOS developers who have economic success, are mostly several large companies that are free of Apple technology and innovation. The complaint is a misleading reason for a judicial report of one of the most popular and innovative consumer products of all time, under the guise of the antimonopoly case.
Most Apple’s responses are Apple, which denies the demands of the milking, one by one, which is standard for this type of submission. The legal disputes now enter the discovery phase, with Apple aimed at extending Altegations is inaccurate. The summary judgment will be issued, which could lead to court and appeal. The whole process will take years.
The ecosystem of the App Store changes so fast that the demands may not be applicable in the future. Last year, Apple changed several App store rules, both volunteers and involuntary. For example, Apple’s legal dispute, as part of epic games, has the result that Apple allows you to direct customers to buy third -party customers on the website with links in the application and without associated fees. Similar changes could further cancel altegace, so it should be interesting to see how the dispute is played.
(Tagstranslate) Apple vs. Rejoice