The Supreme Court has decided to hear an interesting case that could decide whether or not Apple has a monopoly on app distribution. The case could have far-reaching implications for a number of tech companies, though it’s likely to be a matter of years before the case is resolved.<\/b>
\nApple is facing yet another antitrust case. The subject this time? Apps. Earlier this year, the Supreme Court agreed to hear Apple Inc. v. Pepper, a case that asks whether or not Apple has monopolized the app market. If the Supreme Court rules against Apple, it could have far-reaching implications for everyone. Now, after hearing Apple\u2019s arguments in the case, it\u2019s looking more and more like that might happen.
According to a report from CNBC, the U. S. Supreme Court appeared skeptical of Apple\u2019s arguments against ruling that the App Store is a monopoly. Two of the judges suggested that the precedent on which Apple is basing its arguments may need to be revised. Despite this, it\u2019s impossible to tell how the Supreme Court will rule \u2014 most cases that have come to the Supreme Court have ended up in favor of corporations. It\u2019s important to note that the Supreme Court isn\u2019t settling the underlying antitrust issue, it\u2019s ruling whether consumers have the right to bring this case against Apple at all.
At the heart of the dispute is the issue of money. Apple both charges developers 30 percent of their app\u2019s revenue, and prevents iOS devices from being able to install apps from other sources. Because of that, some argue that Apple has inflated the price of iPhone apps in an effort to make more money.
On the other side, Apple argues that the plaintiffs, who are consumers, don\u2019t have the right to sue Apple under current U. S. antitrust laws. The key to that argument, as noted in a report by Wired, is a case from 1977, Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois, which resulted in a ruling that you can\u2019t sue for an antitrust case if you didn\u2019t directly purchase goods or services. Because of that, Apple says, it\u2019s not selling apps to customers, the developers are through the App Store.
The only problem with that is that the plaintiffs are arguing that Apple has monopolized app distribution \u2014 not necessarily apps themselves. There is evidence of that on Android; users can get apps from the Google Play Store, but they can also get them from Amazon and other third-party stores, too, if they so choose.
The case could result in some major changes for consumers and Apple alike. If Apple wins the case, nothing much will change with how it and developers interact, and developers will still be forced to go through the App Store and abide by Apple\u2019s rules. If the plaintiffs win, however, Apple may have to pay hundreds of millions of dollars and it may have implications for other large tech companies that sell products from third parties, including the likes of Amazon.
Updated on November 26,2018: The Supreme Court has heard Apple\u2019s oral arguments.<\/p>\n