[ad_1]
A lawsuit against Apple likely to impede one of the company's biggest revenue earners was heard this morning before the Supreme Court, in the country's High Court, on the basis of questions and comments from judges – seeming to side with the iPhone owners who filed the lawsuit in the first place.
The issue in this case is whether iOS device owners have the right to file a lawsuit against Apple under the terms of its App Store, which the plaintiffs believe violate federal antitrust laws. The App Store takes a 30% discount on developers who sell their app through the store, which consumers say is a cost to them. In addition, iOS device owners can only purchase apps through the App Store as they "jailbreak" their phone. Of course, Apple argues that plaintiffs should not be allowed to sue for application sales, because Apple says it does not sell applications directly to consumers, but simply pbad them on to developers as a kind d & # 39; intermediary.
This morning, however, during an hour of oral argument, some judges appeared skeptical.
Judge Neil Gorsuch, appointed by President Trump, asked, according to a report by Reuters . , if a key decision of 1977 is appropriate in this case. In that earlier decision, the highest court limited the damages in monopoly cases to those directly injured and not to those who were indirectly overtaxed. Gorsuch wondered how much it applied to the modern market.
Judge Elena Kagan, nominated by President Obama, seemed to side with those who claim that consumers have a direct relationship with Apple when they buy apps. via the App Store. "From my point of view," she said, "I engaged in a one-step deal with Apple." Chief Justice John Roberts, nominated by George W. Bush, nonetheless suggested that he be sided with Apple and seemed afraid that it would end up being held responsible both by consumers and developers d & # 39; applications.
The Reuters Report continues by providing a key context explaining why this case is so important: "Apple, also backed by the American Chamber of Commerce. The group told judges in the legal press that lining up on the side of iPhone users who allegedly filed lawsuits would threaten the burgeoning field of e-commerce, which generates hundreds of billions of dollars in retail sales in the United States.
"The complainants, as well as antitrust watchdog groups, have stated that the closure of courthouse doors to those who purchase finished goods would undermine antitrust enforcement and allow monopoly behavior. to grow without control. The plaintiffs were supported by 30 state attorneys general, including Texas, California and New York.
A professional group of application developers, The App Association, also released a statement alongside Apple. This group stated that the customer "unequivocally buys from the developer of the application, and not from the platform by which the developer sold his application".
A decision is expected in the late spring. CNBC today described this lawsuit as the most important commercial litigation of the current court and as "the largest litigation that Apple has faced outside of its pursuit of a court case. billion dollars in intellectual property against chip maker Qualcomm. 19659010] Source of the picture: thanat sasipatanapa
Source link
