11-09-2021, 10:17 AM
By MICHAEL LIEDTKE
yesterday
SAN RAMON, Calif. (AP) — A federal judge ordered Apple to dismantle a lucrative part of the competitive barricade guarding its closely run iPhone app store, but rejected allegations that the company has been running an illegal monopoly that stifles competition and innovation.
The ruling issued Friday continues to chip away at the so-called “walled garden” that Apple has built around its crown jewel, the iPhone, and its app store, without toppling it completely.
......
While parts of her decision raised questions about whether Apple’s fees were driving up prices for consumers, Gonzalez Rogers left the fee structure intact and upheld the company’s right to block other stores from offering apps for its iPhone. She sided with Apple on every other key point of the case.
But the judge did conclude Apple has been engaging in unfair competition under California law, prompting her to order the company to allow developers throughout the U.S. to insert links to other payment options besides its own within iPhone apps. That change would make it easier for app developers to avoid paying Apple’s commissions, potentially affecting billions of dollars in revenue annually.
......
“It’s a bit of a mixed bag,” said Stanford University law professor Mark Lemley. “I think on balance, it’s a win for Apple. They dodged the biggest threat to them.”
......
Since that trial ended, Apple has taken two steps to loosen some of its app store rules — one to settle a lawsuit and another to appease Japanese regulators without altering its commissions. Those concessions make it easier for many apps to prod their users to pay for digital transactions in ways that avoid triggering Apple’s fees.
......
In a research note, Cowen Washington Research Group analyst Doug Creutz said the inclusion of in-app links to other payment options could increase the pressure on Apple to lower its commissions.
https://apnews.com/article/technology-bu...4f888a6f0d
yesterday
SAN RAMON, Calif. (AP) — A federal judge ordered Apple to dismantle a lucrative part of the competitive barricade guarding its closely run iPhone app store, but rejected allegations that the company has been running an illegal monopoly that stifles competition and innovation.
The ruling issued Friday continues to chip away at the so-called “walled garden” that Apple has built around its crown jewel, the iPhone, and its app store, without toppling it completely.
......
While parts of her decision raised questions about whether Apple’s fees were driving up prices for consumers, Gonzalez Rogers left the fee structure intact and upheld the company’s right to block other stores from offering apps for its iPhone. She sided with Apple on every other key point of the case.
But the judge did conclude Apple has been engaging in unfair competition under California law, prompting her to order the company to allow developers throughout the U.S. to insert links to other payment options besides its own within iPhone apps. That change would make it easier for app developers to avoid paying Apple’s commissions, potentially affecting billions of dollars in revenue annually.
......
“It’s a bit of a mixed bag,” said Stanford University law professor Mark Lemley. “I think on balance, it’s a win for Apple. They dodged the biggest threat to them.”
......
Since that trial ended, Apple has taken two steps to loosen some of its app store rules — one to settle a lawsuit and another to appease Japanese regulators without altering its commissions. Those concessions make it easier for many apps to prod their users to pay for digital transactions in ways that avoid triggering Apple’s fees.
......
In a research note, Cowen Washington Research Group analyst Doug Creutz said the inclusion of in-app links to other payment options could increase the pressure on Apple to lower its commissions.
https://apnews.com/article/technology-bu...4f888a6f0d