Posted on 05/13/2019 7:28:45 AM PDT by Red Badger
Key Points
The Supreme Court on Monday ruled 5-4 against Apple in a case involving its signature electronic marketplace, the App Store, allowing iPhone users to move forward with their suit against the company.
The iPhone users argued that Apple’s 30% commission on sales through the App Store was passed along to consumers, an unfair use of monopoly power. Apple argued that only app developers, and not users, should be able to bring such a lawsuit.
“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,” Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnbc.com ...
Ping!.................
I absolutely detest Apple.
I don’t get it.
“The iPhone users argued that Apple’s 30% commission on sales through the App Store was passed along to consumers”
Are not iPhone users and consumers the same folks by a different title? No?
If I am right about “iPhone users” and “consumers” then why are consumers arguing that Apple’s commissions are passed along to them.
If I am wrong, that iPhone users and consumers are NOT the same batch of persons, then just who are the “consumers” that iPhone users are complaining about getting Apple’s commissions?
Apple was arguing that the “iPhone users” / “consumers” did not have standing to sue, but that the app developers did have standing to sue. They were trying to get the case thrown out of court.
The court disagreed, because the costs (commissions) were passed on to the users / consumers.
That 30% commission is too high a burden for third party developers to pass on to 'their' customers.
You misunderstand. The costs are passed to consumers, not the profits.
5-4 split, Kavanaugh writing for the liberals. Roberts and the three conservatives in dissent.
Good. Apple needs some of its arrogance slapped down.....
Bravo!
So do I.
And Google and Facebook and Twitter and Microsoft...
Tough times for the Borg.
The real story here isn’t hat Apple lost, but that Kavanaugh jumped hip again and sided with the liberals again. He’s looking pretty shaky so far.
Well I do have an unlocked android smart phone.
I wonder how much this is affecting Apple with them making their phones in China. Couldn’t happen to a better company.
Steve Jobs refused to accept he could have fathered a daughter and not until the end after DNA testing did he provide financial security for her. Never liked Jobs.
There are reasons to dislike all of the ones you listed, but Google is the worst of the bunch. “Don’t be evil” my rear.
I am at a point where the only opinion on the SCOTUS that is ever correct comes from Justice Thomas. He dissented in this case.
Is the app store the only way for iPhone users to get apps? With android you can download an apk from anywhere on the web and install it.
We saw a peculiar case last year with the Carpenter decision. Roberts sided with the liberals in ruling that cell phone records were subject to Fourth Amendment protections. Most Freepers agreed with that ruling, but on reading Justice Thomas’ dissent it was obvious to me that under a clear reading of the Constitution the Fourth Amendment was not applicable.
Many people just see headlines and don’t put any rational thought into it. It’s just, “Good! I hate (insert company here)! That’ll show ‘em!”
It’s not like Android where it’s an option you check or uncheck. You have to jailbreak it.
I see it as a reasonable anti-idiot feature.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.