Skip to content

Apple Trial Ends in Mixed Verdict After Epic’s Monopoly Allegations

wsj.com
66 pointscokernel_hacker10 comments
On HN

Comments

the Court does not find that Apple is an antitrust monopolist in the submarket for mobile gaming transactions. However, it does find that Apple’s conduct in enforcing anti-steering restrictions is anticompetitive. A remedy to eliminate those provisions is appropriate.
“The Court does not find that Apple is an antitrust monopolist in the submarket for mobile gaming transactions,” the judge wrote. “However, it does find that Apple’s conduct in enforcing anti-steering restrictions is anticompetitive.”

followed by:

“Today the Court has affirmed what we’ve known all along: the App Store is not in violation of antitrust law,” Apple said.

Only from a lawyer....

This is from the FTC: "The FTC's competition mission is to enforce the rules of the competitive marketplace — the antitrust laws. These laws promote vigorous competition and protect consumers from anticompetitive mergers and business practices" [1]

[1] https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/competition-guidance/guide-a...

Both Apple and Epic are considering an appeal of the decision : https://twitter.com/bobbyallyn/status/1436386058317402112?s=...

Sounds like a good compromise then

Your causality is backwards. There are many, many ways to impose a "compromise" that no one is happy with because it leaves everyone worse off than they were before.

Wonder if Epic is also going to do the same on their store too?

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.