Apple meets with DOJ before impending antitrust lawsuit is filed

The United States Department of Justice seems to be in its final stages before filing an antitrust suit against Apple.

It has been a long and winding road if you've been following the DOJ's probe into Apple's business practices. Spotify started the process in 2019 with pushes from Apple's other competitors following suit in 2020, 2021, and 2022.

It was claimed the DOJ was drafting an antitrust complaint against Apple in 2023. Finally, according to a report from Bloomberg, Apple has had the customary pre-filing meeting referred to as "last rites" before a lawsuit is filed.

Despite hearing this song and dance for multiple years in a row, the meeting is the truest sign yet that the United States Department of Justice is ready to file an antitrust suit against Apple. The lawsuit would focus on Apple's practices as the judge, jury, and executioner of the App Store and its locked-down operating systems.

The DOJ was likely waiting to see what Apple's response to the EU's Digital Markets Act would be. It developed over 600 APIs to allow third-party app marketplaces to distribute apps outside the App Store.

Now that these changes are implemented in iOS 17.4, there is a chance that the DOJ will attempt to get the same feature changes in the United States. However, there hasn't been universal praise for Apple's so-called malicious compliance.

The lawsuit took years to develop, so don't expect a swift solution. It could take years of litigation before a solution is agreed upon and implemented, not to mention an impending election that could upend a lot of decision-making.

25 Comments

baconstang 1160 comments · 10 Years

About 9 months ago

Again, just offer up 2 versions. One that stays locked down as it currently is. The other is open with side loading and any payment system you desire.
If you stay with the 'Walled Garden', there is an indication to others (in txt and email etc) that you are more likely to be secure.

foregoneconclusion 2857 comments · 12 Years

The DOJ was likely waiting to see what Apple's response to the EU's Digital Markets Act would be. It developed over 600 APIs to allow third-party app marketplaces to distribute apps outside the App Store.
Now that these changes are implemented in iOS 17.4, there is a chance that the DOJ will attempt to get the same feature changes in the United States. However, there hasn't been universal praise for Apple's so-called malicious compliance.

That's not how it works. The EU didn't prosecute Apple in court. They used the legislative process to create a market cap that says certain activities are legal below the cap and illegal above the cap. In other words, they didn't try to prove that Apple was violating existing antitrust laws in the EU. They just created new laws. So the DOJ isn't really going to be waiting on anything related to the EU since it's entirely irrelevant. The DOJ has to prosecute Apple in court. They have to prove that Apple violated existing antitrust law in the United States.

If the DOJ was going to wait on something it would have been the U.S. Congress. Congress had considered legislation regarding tech companies but it never gained enough momentum to go anywhere.

gatorguy 24627 comments · 13 Years

foregoneconclusion said:

The DOJ was likely waiting to see what Apple's response to the EU's Digital Markets Act would be. It developed over 600 APIs to allow third-party app marketplaces to distribute apps outside the App Store.
Now that these changes are implemented in iOS 17.4, there is a chance that the DOJ will attempt to get the same feature changes in the United States. However, there hasn't been universal praise for Apple's so-called malicious compliance.
That's not how it works. The EU didn't prosecute Apple in court. They used the legislative process to create a market cap that says certain activities are legal below the cap and illegal above the cap. In other words, they didn't try to prove that Apple was violating existing antitrust laws in the EU. They just created new laws. So the DOJ isn't really going to be waiting on anything related to the EU since it's entirely irrelevant. The DOJ has to prosecute Apple in court. They have to prove that Apple violated existing antitrust law in the United States.
If the DOJ was going to wait on something it would have been the U.S. Congress. Congress had considered legislation regarding tech companies but it never gained enough momentum to go anywhere.

Apple fast approaching 65% market share in the US won't be helpful to their defense.

gatorguy said: Apple fast approaching 65% market share in the US won't be helpful to their defense.

Market share isn't relevant. Apple lost the e-book lawsuit regarding illegal conspiracy at a time when Amazon controlled almost 90% of the ebook market. So the courts didn't care about Amazon's dominance. They cared that Apple was found to have conspired with a group of publishers to raise the price of ebooks on the NYT bestseller list.

And the reality is that Amazon has a horrendous commission structure for ebooks relative to the App Store and it doesn't really matter. Amazon takes 30% commission on ebooks priced between $2.99 and $9.99 and a 60% commission on anything above or below that price range. So not only are they taking as high or higher of a cut than Apple does in the App Store, they're also trying to set a specific price range.

foregoneconclusion said:

gatorguy said: Apple fast approaching 65% market share in the US won't be helpful to their defense.

Market share isn't relevant. Apple lost the e-book lawsuit regarding illegal conspiracy at a time when Amazon controlled almost 90% of the ebook market. So the courts didn't care about Amazon's dominance. They cared that Apple was found to have conspired with a group of publishers to raise the price of ebooks on the NYT bestseller list.

And the reality is that Amazon has a horrendous commission structure for ebooks relative to the App Store and it doesn't really matter. Amazon takes 30% commission on ebooks priced between $2.99 and $9.99 and a 60% commission on anything above or below that price range. So not only are they taking as high or higher of a cut than Apple does in the App Store, they're also trying to set a specific price range.

The book case concerned illegal collusion that resulted in price fixing between Apple and the major publishers. 65% market share is absolutely a relevant statistic when it comes to a company's exposure to antitrust claims.