[Closi]

> Can someone explain how Google has a monopoly when there are competitors in their league?

Being a monopoly doesn’t mean you have no competitors - it means you have enough control of the market to artificially affect/set the market price for something (ie that there was not enough competition for efficient pricing).

[onlyrealcuzzo]

> it means you have enough control of the market to artificially affect/set the market price for something

Does it? Then why isn't every App Store's 30% developer fee a much more obvious monopoly?

[minhazm]

I think in the case of Apple it's more difficult to challenge due to the existence of Android. iOS doesn't even have 50% of the market mobile OS market share globally. You can argue Apple has a monopoly on their own products, but then we'd need to also discuss the same for Xbox, Playstation, Nintendo, and any other device that has its own marketplace.

[midoridensha]

I'm not sure about the stats on gaming consoles, but Apple has over 50% marketshare in the US last I checked, and we're talking about US law here so US marketshare is really more important than how many Android phones people in India and China have. So having a majority of the market which almost everyone these days buys from (almost everyone has a smartphone now, not like gaming consoles which are a niche market), and then forcing everyone with an iDevice to use the Apple App store, is a clear monopoly unlike some gaming console that a small single-digit percentage of the population (or less) owns, and competes with 2 other big competitors, is not the same.

[neop1x]

It is not just about AppStore fees but also about the fact that you are forbidden to use any other store to buy/download apps from and you are forbidden use any 3rd-partty payment processor for payments inside your app. They force you to use their systems with 30% cut. That feels anti-competitive quite a lot!

[Closi]

Well that's presumably why Apple will allow sideloading in the next version of iOS.

(i.e. in an effort to demonstrate competitiveness)

[dannyr]

That's a different antitrust violation.

This one is about ad tech.

DoJ is probably filing this lawsuit first either it's easier to win and/or they have gathered enough evidence.

Pretty sure they are looking into App Store antitrust too.

[wyldfire]

> why isn't every App Store's 30% developer fee a much more obvious monopoly?

It is also a monopoly. [1]

[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-12-13/will-appl...

[criddell]

And Spotify too! They hold on to 30% of every dollar they handle as well.

AFAIK, the app stores on gaming consoles want a similar cut.

[paulluuk]

The 30% fee is being targeted in the EU as monopolistic abuse (or whatever the proper legal term is)

[brookst]

Does Ford have a monopoly on selling Mustangs?

The critical thing here is how you define "market". Some people say that iPhones are a market, therefore Apple is a monopoly. Some people (like Apple) say that mobile devices are market, and Apple has like 30% market share.

[CardenB]

You would have to show that that apple has colluded with other app stores to maintain a 30% fee. Otherwise, they charge the fee, and a competitor is free to attract developers with a lower fee, which is competition.

You could argue that apple abused their market position to administer the fee. Or you could argue that they are entitled to charge the fee and consumers are free to leave the platform. It's a grey area.

[costco]

Isn't it specifically whether they could impose a small but significant non-transitory price increase?