Brunbrun6766@lemmy.world
on 24 May 2024 05:03
nextcollapse
Me neither. Anyone who uses Android knows there are multiple different app store fronts and side loading etc. apple just has the app store. These judges are taking crazy pills or something
Badeendje@lemmy.world
on 24 May 2024 21:54
collapse
It is about using your monopoly to influence the market and playing favorites for your own gain without disclosing your bias. If you highlight certain apps not because they are good but because they make you the most money, you are well on your way to abusing your monopoly.
And having your appstore installed means 90% of people never venture outside the walled garden. So even if there are theoretical alternatives, in practice there aren’t.
phoneymouse@lemmy.world
on 24 May 2024 05:34
nextcollapse
It’s pretty simple. Google was using the monopoly in ways that benefit some businesses. Rather than charging everyone the same commission rates, they were caught excusing some businesses from those rates.
Apple on the other hand enforces their commission equally on everyone.
It’s easier to argue that you’re operating a monopoly harmful to competition when you’re using your position to pick and choose winners.
QuarterSwede@lemmy.world
on 26 May 2024 20:44
collapse
That’s not true though. Large companies get commission breaks like Netflix at 15%.
phoneymouse@lemmy.world
on 26 May 2024 21:37
collapse
Could you link a source? If there are any commission reductions; it’s spelled out in policy and applies equally to all app developers of that type.
Google had secret back room deals for some developers that weren’t following the policy other app developers were subjected to. If you can find an example of Apple having secret back room deals that cut some developers a break and not others, I’d be interested to see it.
QuarterSwede@lemmy.world
on 27 May 2024 02:04
collapse
It’s been in news articles here and there.
phoneymouse@lemmy.world
on 27 May 2024 05:36
collapse
Can’t seem to find one
dracs@programming.dev
on 24 May 2024 05:35
collapse
As I understand it (from my non-legal casual read of the new coverage). Having a monopoly isn’t illegal, abusing it is. For Google they found that google was secretly paying companies to not put their apps on other stores. That was what they got the judgement against them. They didn’t find anything like that for Apple.
helenslunch@feddit.nl
on 07 Jul 2024 23:22
collapse
As I understand it (from my non-legal casual read of the new coverage). Having a monopoly isn’t illegal, abusing it is.
If you wanna get legal about it, none of this has anything to do with a Monopoly. No one has a monopoly. The “mono” prefix means “one”. And there are at least 2 massive competitors in the space of app stores.
fiercekitten@lemm.ee
on 24 May 2024 05:29
collapse
Considering users can install any apps they want on most android devices, Google’s argument that it will compromise safety and tarnish google’s image seems absurd.
threaded - newest
.
Me neither. Anyone who uses Android knows there are multiple different app store fronts and side loading etc. apple just has the app store. These judges are taking crazy pills or something
It is about using your monopoly to influence the market and playing favorites for your own gain without disclosing your bias. If you highlight certain apps not because they are good but because they make you the most money, you are well on your way to abusing your monopoly.
And having your appstore installed means 90% of people never venture outside the walled garden. So even if there are theoretical alternatives, in practice there aren’t.
It’s pretty simple. Google was using the monopoly in ways that benefit some businesses. Rather than charging everyone the same commission rates, they were caught excusing some businesses from those rates.
Apple on the other hand enforces their commission equally on everyone.
It’s easier to argue that you’re operating a monopoly harmful to competition when you’re using your position to pick and choose winners.
That’s not true though. Large companies get commission breaks like Netflix at 15%.
Could you link a source? If there are any commission reductions; it’s spelled out in policy and applies equally to all app developers of that type.
Google had secret back room deals for some developers that weren’t following the policy other app developers were subjected to. If you can find an example of Apple having secret back room deals that cut some developers a break and not others, I’d be interested to see it.
It’s been in news articles here and there.
Can’t seem to find one
As I understand it (from my non-legal casual read of the new coverage). Having a monopoly isn’t illegal, abusing it is. For Google they found that google was secretly paying companies to not put their apps on other stores. That was what they got the judgement against them. They didn’t find anything like that for Apple.
If you wanna get legal about it, none of this has anything to do with a Monopoly. No one has a monopoly. The “mono” prefix means “one”. And there are at least 2 massive competitors in the space of app stores.
Considering users can install any apps they want on most android devices, Google’s argument that it will compromise safety and tarnish google’s image seems absurd.