Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Okkef 2193 days ago
I wish I could downvote you. What apple is doing is much worse than microsoft ever did, and they deserve to get a big antitrust lawsuit against them.

Just because their own rules say 'everybody owes us money' doesn't mean that it's legal.

3 comments

These aren’t Apple’s rules–they’re ours. It’s the parameters of a free marketplace and flows from the idea of legal ownership of property. Apple has a minority share of the smartphone market, so antitrust does not apply. Antitrust a specific remedy to prevent monopolistic abuses.

If I build a high end hotel and the fee is $10,000 a night to stay there, you can’t apply to the Supreme Court to have your bill reduced. It’s my hotel and I can set the price to whatever I damn well please because it’s a free market.

This analogy makes no sense. It’s not a business to consumer issue. The problem is Apple running their own marketplace and inconsistently applying the rules they have created for that marketplace.

If the hotel opened a food court and treated the vendors like this, it might be an apt analogy.

Well, let’s use the food court analogy then: whoever owns the food court is permitted by law to set whatever rental prices they choose for their tenants (provided they aren’t discriminating against people based on certain characteristics). They don’t have to be consistent, because the food court is their property and they have very wide discretion over how it is used. Fair? No. Legal? Yes!
I think it’s legality is up for discussion (that’s the discussion people are currently having). Because your analogy still falls short because the hotel now opened their own stall in the food court and is competing in the marketplace.

What are they doing with the proprietary data from other marketplace competitors?

The consumer owns the phone, not Apple, so that's a bad analogy.
>> Apple has a minority share of the smartphone market, so antitrust does not apply.

That's literally an Apple to Oranges comparison. Market share is not a requirement for illegality under the Sherman Act, as an example.

This made me smile :D
:)
You are absolutely right. I real feel disappointed I cannot downvote him. People are so deluded by Apple fanaticism and "free market" that we shouldn't even touch a monopol with a stick.
I’m no Apple or free market fanatic, I’m just explaining that these attacks are going nowhere under our legal and financial system. They are pipe dreams that come round every twelve months or so, and will remain that way unless we radically change the nature of legal property. This particular one is out of the hey.com marketing budget, but I’m sure it won’t be the last.
This isn't about money. If the app had free registration inside the app it would pass the guidelines.