Supreme Court rules iPhone users can sue Apple over App Store prices

The Supreme Court on Monday said that iPhone users can proceed with a class-action lawsuit against Apple over its control of app sales in a ruling that could threaten the company's exclusive marketplace of third-party software.

A group of consumers had sued Apple, claiming that the company's monopoly over its App Store led to inflated app prices. Apple disputed the legality of the suit, arguing the consumers had no standing to sue the company because it merely operated the App Store as an intermediary between users and the developers who make and sell apps.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote the opinion for the 5-4 decision, surprising many by breaking with his conservative colleagues and siding with the court's liberal justices.

Ed Black, the president and CEO of the Computer & Communications Industry Association, a trade group which filed a brief in support of Apple, called the ruling “disappointing.”

“We are concerned that the outcome of this ruling expands a previous ruling (Illinois Brick’s), and increases liability risks for multi-sided business models,” Black said in a statement. “The decision may unintentionally expose businesses offering digital platform services to unintended liability.”

The decision comes as Apple and other tech companies face growing antitrust scrutiny over the way they operate their platforms. The high court provided a rare win for antitrust reformers, who see large tech companies as a unique threat to competition and consumers.

“I think it’ll have clear implications for tech companies,” said Sandeep Vaheesan, the legal director at the Open Markets Institute, which filed an amicus brief in the case in support of Pepper.

Vaheesan applauded the majority opinion for recognizing that the Sherman Act of 1890, the nation’s first federal antitrust law, gave consumers the right to bring lawsuits against alleged monopolies.

Apple, Vaheesan said, is “really the giant sitting between the two ends of the market.”

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/443358-supreme-court-rules-class-action-lawsuit-against-apple-can-advance

>>6495332

Panic?

Is the Supreme Court decision on Apple really good for consumers?

…the decision clearly shows that antitrust rules are flexible enough to apply to new practices by technology companies to control prices and access to products. The most chilling line of the ruling for those companies may be, “If a retailer has engaged in unlawful monopolistic conduct that has caused consumers to pay higher than competitive prices, it does not matter how the retailer structured its relationship with an upstream manufacturer or supplier.” For consumer advocates, it is the shattering of a myth that will encourage others to sue these companies for predatory practices.

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/443546-is-the-supreme-court-decision-on-apple-really-good-for-consumers

Psssssst…..December 1984, and the launch of the Apple Macintosh computer

>>6495332

>>6495340

CLASS ACTION LAWSUITS ARE VERY EFFECTIVE.

Q

The Man in the Arena

It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.

President Theodore Roosevelt

1910

>>6495535

>>6495549

Meme requests:

Pepe as Man in the Arena

POTUS as Man in the Arena