[HN Gopher] Apple cannot ban links to outside App Store payments...
___________________________________________________________________
Apple cannot ban links to outside App Store payments, U.S. appeals
court
Author : pseudolus
Score : 22 points
Date : 2023-04-24 21:29 UTC (1 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.reuters.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.reuters.com)
| usr1106 wrote:
| I wonder why a US appeals court is needed for that decision.
|
| This should be obvious to any laymen who has heard that antitrust
| legislation exists.
| dragonwriter wrote:
| > I wonder why a US appeals court is needed for that decision.
|
| Because it was an issue disputed in a US District Court case,
| and someone disagreed with the outcome.
|
| > This should be obvious to any laymen who has heard that
| antitrust legislation exists.
|
| The same decision (applying California unfair competition law
| on the headline question) also found Apple was not violating
| anti-trust law, so, your hypothetical layman would have come to
| the right conclusion only by coincidence, on the wrong basis.
| usr1106 wrote:
| My comment was sarcastic. Of course the legal system works
| like you describe.
|
| The spirit of antitrust legislation is that competition
| should not be harmed by one or few dominant players. I would
| claim it is very clear that Apple (and Google) harm
| competition in the mobile space. If this cannot be prevented
| using the existing laws, new legislation is required.
| Monopolies and duopolies are harmful.
| crazygringo wrote:
| You might discover that even laymen disagree with each other
| far more often than you might think.
|
| Most things that make it to court, and especially to appeals,
| actually have important arguments on both sides. If it's in
| court, it's pretty much by definition non-obvious.
| usr1106 wrote:
| So what is Apple's important argument? Hindering competition
| increases our earnings? We know best what the customer wants?
| nightski wrote:
| It's really sad that money always wins and the future of
| computing is a 30% tax from Silicon Valley behemoths. Congrats
| everyone we did it.
| stale2002 wrote:
| Well, this is just one battle.
|
| A "win" for Apple, in an individual battle, merely means that
| the status quo remains unchanged. They have to win every
| battle, to win the war.
|
| And Apple is already losing very significant battles elsewhere.
|
| For example, in the EU, with the soon to be in effect App Store
| laws, Apple is being forced to allow sideloading, and won't be
| able to charge the 300% fee, in the EU.
|
| In the USA, maybe this court case fails. But there are more
| court cases being brought against them, and also laws being
| considered that could force Apple to change anyway, even if
| they win the current court battles.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-04-24 23:01 UTC)