IBM

Apple Antitrust Lawsuit Means GAME OVER

Apple Antitrust Lawsuit Means GAME OVER

#Apple #Antitrust #Lawsuit #Means #GAME

“America’s Attorney”

The DOJ has hit Apple with an antitrust lawsuit claiming they’re attempting to monopolize the smartphone industry. Does this lawsuit hold any weight? America’s Attorney breaks it down.

#apple #lawsuit #antitrust

TikTok Ban PASSES In the House – Lawyer…

source

 

To see the full content, share this page by clicking one of the buttons below

Related Articles

18 Comments

  1. Same as if the DOJ sued Microsoft for not running mac apps on Windows, ridiculous. Sure Apple should probably create some mechanism for side-loading apps and allowing alternative payment methods (similar to a web interface), but they need to be able to maintain security and privacy before anything else.

  2. I’m a long time iPhone user…and also iPad, Mac, and Apple Watch. For music streaming, I use Spotify. My headphones are Bose. Let people make choices!

  3. The most crazy thing happen to me today.
    I was playing a game on my ancient iphone 6s plus. My game froze.
    I touched the screen a few times with no response.
    I clicked my home button to exit. Then i get a message after the app closed. "Confirm purchase" with my finger print icon.
    Sense i clicked my home button. With my finger print sensor. It athorized $118 purchase in a game!
    That was my last $104.
    It put me negative! But ive never been able to go negative before!
    I called apple instantly. And i have to wait up to 48hours. JUST FOR A RESPONSE!!!!!!!!
    Tooks them .5 seconds to take my only money. But prolly be a week if i CAN even get it back😢
    Im at my breaking point with these tech business and their set ups.

  4. Remember, Apple is the company that came out with its out variation of the USB connector so you'd be forced to buy from them, at outrageous prices. They also got rid of headphone jacks so you'd have to buy their headphones, again at outrageous prices.

  5. Apple has a """monopoly""" only because they make a superior product. When you buy an iPhone and install an app, you know it will work. All iPhones and iOS devices use the same OS and all apps work on that OS. On Android, however, you have no idea if the app you downloaded will work. Is the app written to be compatible with your phone hardware? Is the app written to be compatible with your version of Android? Will the app look correct, i.e., was it written to be compatible with the display resolution and dimensions of your phone?

    But, no, Apple does not have a monopoly on the smartphone business. Android is a very strong second place There may even be more Android devices in use than Apple, but Apple has the prestige and the popularity of the cool kids.. However, Android is diversified among phone manufacturers and versions of Android, whereas Apple is monolithic.

  6. The entire Anti-trust laws are horrendous. Imagine you build an entirely new branch of industry and then get destroyed through Government force for having come up with, and having "monopolized" said industry. Any monopoly will be replaced if it does not earn this place by win-win relations – except when the government gets involved and protects it. Watch what happened to Nokia, etc.
    This tells businessmen that they are object to undefinable, arbitrary laws and must fear the wraith of the government if they become too large by any which means the government sees fit. This is horrendous.

  7. My first cell phone ever was the iPhone 3G, then the 4 & 5S but ONLY after they were Jailbroken. I then tried a $50 Blu Android phone to see if I could switch & I've never looked back.
    The ONE, thing that Apple should & MUST do is at least implement basic RCS messaging. That is my main beef with Apple, why can't I have read receipts, better picture sending and a few extra features on my Flip 5 when my Mom has an iPhone, why are we artificially stuck using BASIC SMS/MMS messaging using technology from the late 90's & early 2000's? That's what frustrates me the most 😠

  8. Mr. America's rebuttal is based on the notion that a company would have to enjoy a monopoly before it could possibly engage in "anti-competitive practices." That's not correct at all. It merely has to "unreasonably restrain competition" by unfair means. In the United States v. Microsoft Corp. case, the U.S. government accused Microsoft of illegally monopolizing the web browser market for Windows, primarily through the legal and technical restrictions it put on the abilities of PC manufacturers (OEMs) and users to uninstall Internet Explorer and use other programs such as Netscape and Java. Even though Microsoft did not have a complete monopoly in the operating system market, it was still found guilty of monopolistic behavior.

Leave a Reply