The remarks to an appeals court came in a lawsuit over app
store fees and payment tools between "Fortnite" video game maker Epic
Games and Apple.
Last year, a U.S. district judge in Oakland, California
mostly ruled against Epic, in a finding that commissions of 15per cent to 30per
cent which Apple charges some app makers for use of an in-app payment system it
forced on them did not violate antitrust law.
While dozens of state attorneys general have filed recent
antitrust lawsuits against other big tech companies, including Facebook owner
Meta Platforms and Alphabet's Google, none had so far taken aim at Apple.
Thursday's remarks, led by the state of Utah and joined by
Colorado, Indiana, Texas, and others, came in a lawsuit in an appeals court
against app store fees and payment tools between Fortnite video game maker Epic
Games and Apple.
"Apple's conduct has harmed and is harming mobile
app-developers and millions of citizens," the states said.
"Meanwhile, Apple continues to monopolise app
distribution and in-app payment solutions for iPhone units, stifle competition,
and amass supracompetitive profits within the almost trillion-dollar-a-year
smartphone industry."
The action comes after a US district judge in Oakland,
California, mostly ruled against Epic last year.
That decision found that commissions of 15 percent to 30
percent which Apple charges some app makers for use of an in-app payment system
the company forced on them did not violate antitrust law.
Epic challenged the ruling in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of
Appeals. On Thursday, professors, activist groups and the states weighed in
through court filings that described legal arguments in support. Apple's reply
is expected in March.
The states said in their filing that the lower court erred
by failing to adequately balance the pros and cons of Apple's rules and also by
deciding that a key antitrust law did not apply to non-negotiable contracts
Apple makes developers sign.
"Paradoxically, firms with enough market power to
unilaterally impose contracts would be protected from antitrust scrutiny —
precisely the firms whose activities give the most cause for antitrust
concern," they said.
0 comments:
Post a Comment