The Apple App Store has been a disruptive force in the mobile market since its launch in 2008. With millions of applications available, the App Store has quickly become one of the most heavily trafficked and profitable platforms for download and purchase. However, while it can be argued that Apple’s App Store has revolutionised the way people access content, many critics suggest that Apple’s App Store is creating a monopoly that limits what consumers can access or do on their phones.
Apple’s control of its platform gives it certain advantages when determining what apps are available for its customers. However, this could potentially limit consumer choice as controversial applications may never make it onto the platform or only get approved after significant delays and decisions made by a small group within Apple Inc. Additionally, due to the open nature of other app ecosystems such as Android, users can install whatever they wish without going through any third-party filter process like they would with the App Store.
The increasing power of the App Store also raises concerns about pricing and competition within application categories where multiple players try to market similar products but must all still come to terms with Apple when deciding prices which could lead to less competition amongst app developers and therefore less innovation in terms of user experiences over time. Furthermore, due to changes in revenue sharing between 2015-2016, some argued developers have significantly less incentive to stay invested in the platform[1]. These issues suggest that consumers should be wary when deciding on their mobile OS knowing there is an imbalance due to Apple’s current level of control over the platform.
Apple-Epic App Store Legal Battle Worries US Antitrust Enforcers
The legal battle between Apple and Epic Games has been raging since August 2020, when Epic Games released an update to its popular game Fortnite that allowed players to bypass Apple’s payment system. Apple immediately removed the game from its App Store, triggering a legal battle between the two companies. The two companies have since clashed over Apple’s control over the App Store and its pricing structure, with Epic Games arguing that the App Store has created an illegal monopoly in the app market. This article will provide a brief overview of the legal battle between Apple and Epic Games, and discuss the impact that the outcome of this battle may have on antitrust enforcement in the United States.
Apple’s App Store
The Apple App Store is an online store that offers applications for Apple devices such as iPhones, iPads, and Mac computers. It allows users to download applications from both free and paid sources. When an application is downloaded from the App Store, users agree to the terms of use and licensing for that particular application which can be found on the app’s page in the App Store.
Apple ensures that all apps sold through the App Store adhere to strict security policies and standards. For example, all applications must undergo an approval process before being sold on the App Store. Furthermore, each application is carefully checked to ensure it does not contain malicious code or violate Apple’s privacy policies. Additionally, Apple has taken great efforts to protect their customers from fraudulent or otherwise malicious apps by using proprietary security features such as iOS sandboxing technology and kernel patch protection feature.
One of the most significant aspects of this platform is its focus on curating content: only a select few app developers are allowed at any given time to create software products for sale on this platform, creating a ‘closed’ digital ecosystem which critics have argued is anticompetitive due to limited options available to consumers when compared with open platforms like Android or PC gaming services such as GOG or Steam. This has become particularly relevant with Fortnite developer Epic Games filing a lawsuit against Apple alleging harassment of other developers similar to Epic Games’ own game-building software tools by refusing access into its platform for competitive reasons via its “anti-competitive” App store rules setting up a legal battle between two tech giants dubbed as one of the biggest of our decade in 2021 .
Epic’s Fight Against Apple
In August 2020, a highly publicised legal battle known as the Epic-Apple feud began when Epic Games launched its popular Fortnite video game for the Apple App Store. Epic added a direct payment system to its app to circumvent the App Store’s 30% fee, which was met with retaliation from Apple by banning Fortnite from their platform and denying Epic access to development tools on the iOS platform.
In response, Epic Games filed an antitrust lawsuit against Apple because Apple’s 30% cut of transactions through their platforms constituted “monopolisation” of certain App Store markets, such as mobile app distribution. Additionally, they argued that their current policies prevent competitors from entering into similar markets – meaning there is minimal competition that could potentially provide consumers better products and/or services.
Epic also doubted Apple’s ability to maintain iOS security if competitors outside of the App Store could launch apps for it – raising concerns about privacy and safety for users who choose to partake in activities within the digital ecosystem. Through this lawsuit, Epic is seeking complete reform for Apple’s revenue model along with potential compensation for damages caused by anti-competitive practices on their part.
US Antitrust Concerns
The long-standing legal battle between Apple and Epic over the App Store’s alleged anti-competitive behaviour has brought increased scrutiny from US antitrust enforcers. As the conflict between the two companies intensifies, American regulatory authorities have raised questions about Apple’s alleged monopolistic practices and their potential effect on the app economy. Let’s explore the implications of this legal battle for US antitrust enforcers.
Apple’s Monopoly in The App Store
In the United States, Apple’s monopolisation of the App Store has been a concern for antitrust regulators and consumers. While antitrust concerns go as far back as 2010, recent developments have brought them to the forefront. In 2020, a coalition of states brought a lawsuit against Apple alleging that it unlawfully maintains a monopoly in app distribution and payment processing through its App Store.
The lawsuit is centred on two anticompetitive effects of Apple’s control over the App Store: developers must pay 30% of their revenue to Apple and have no other way to distribute content than through the App Store. In addition, buyers can only buy apps from the App Store because their devices are locked into iOS and there are substantial switching costs if they want to move to another platform. The lawsuit argues that these two effects give Apple “monopoly power in app distribution and payment processing” resulting in higher consumer prices.
Additionally, concerns have been raised about Apple’s enforcement of its app guidelines. Proponents of stricter antitrust regulation argue that by arbitrarily applying its policies to favoured developers while blocking or removing apps from small businesses, Apple has exercised its control over access to apps with unchecked discretion, eliminating competition and other potential newcomers from entering the market.
These issues have raised questions about whether regulators should restrict or modify existing antitrust laws that have not kept up with the changing landscape created by technology companies such as Apple. While there is currently no clear solution on how best to approach this issue, it is clear that unless changes are made soon, consumers will continue to bear the burden of dealing with anti-competitive behaviour in this rapidly evolving market sector.
Apple’s Restrictive Practices
Under the aegis of the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the U.S. government investigates antitrust concerns related to Apple’s ownership and daily operation of the App Store. Specifically, the concern centres on Apple’s control over app prices and how it sets restrictions regarding developers and competitors who aim to use their platform.
At its core, this monopolistic behaviour means that Apple has unchecked authority over which apps can be offered in its App Store, sets all rules governing purchases within it, sets purchase prices for services, decides which payment processing companies can be used in its store, determines which third-party programs are compatible with apps bought through it, and enforces restrictions that impede rival software stores from competing against it.
Furthermore, criticism also extends to Apple’s control over “in-app” content purchases – meaning any additional downloads or upgrades that must happen through an app you’ve already downloaded from its store such as a magazine subscription or extra levels in game components – as well as its insistence that all such transactions must occur through its payment systems – called “Apple Pay” – despite its typically sizeable fees.
Critics contend that these practices effectively bar competition by limiting access to programs offered by rivals on other devices and platforms; blocking customers from accessing lower-priced offerings; and preventing developers from offering their services on alternative platforms. In short: by creating a monopoly position for itself within digital applications marketplaces, Apple is arguably able to raise product prices for consumers at will while simultaneously eliminating utility competition & creating uncompromising barriers to entry within product markets to limit choices & influence market price points accordingly.
Potential Outcomes
As Apple and Epic Games vie for control in the legal battle over the App Store, the US antitrust enforcers are watching closely. The potential outcomes of the case range from no major changes to dramatic implications for Apple and the app ecosystem. This article will examine the potential outcomes of the Apple-Epic App Store legal battle and its implications for US antitrust regulations.
Apple’s App Store Regulations
When the App Store was originally launched in 2008, Apple established strict rules governing which apps and content were allowed on the platform. In recent years, Apple has continued to enforce rules that give the company unprecedented control over which apps can be released and what pricing may be charged by developers. However, Apple’s app regulations have been criticised as going too far in protecting its market share by creating a monopoly power for itself.
Apple has several regulations for the App Store, including guidelines regarding user security and privacy. It also has guidelines related to app content, including prohibiting certain categories of apps from being available on iOS devices. For example, content involving violence, gambling, pornography or an offensive political or religious nature is not allowed, nor are suggestive clothing or sexual references in app artwork or advertising components. Additionally, there are regulations concerning developer commissions and fees and technical requirements for apps submitted to the App Store.
Apple’s control of its store’s content not only shields it from any losses incurred due to less-than-optimal quality apps but also ensures that none of its competitors will get an advantage over them in terms of either cost or quality of services offered through the App Store’s second-party platform offerings. With such stringent regulations and essentially no other app stores available on iOS devices, it’s arguable that Apple has created a de facto monopoly in this respect – one powerful enough to stifle innovation and suppress alternate voices within its walls.
Epic’s Legal Arguments
In its legal battle against Apple, Epic Games is making multiple arguments. In its Complaint filed on August 13, 2020 with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Epic claims that Apple’s App Store is an illegal monopoly and asks for a preliminary injunction preventing Apple from retaliating against Epic for rejecting the App Store guidelines. According to filings, Epic’s main arguments include:
1. Apple’s contract terms are anticompetitive and constitute a monopolisation in violation of federal law;
2. Apple’s refusal to allow alternative app stores violates antitrust laws;
3. iOS developers are locked into using the App Store, creating an oppressive ecosystem of viewing and downloading apps;
4. Developers are forced to pay “exorbitant commissions” (up to 30%) when selling digital goods or services in their apps;
5. App Store approval process is arbitrary, unpredictable and opaque which hinders competition in the marketplace; and
6. The licensing agreement between developers and Apple is unfair as developers have limited control over their products once they sign up to use the App Store.
Conclusion
This analysis concludes that Apple has created a monopoly within the App Store that it can exploit to its advantage. Still, the powers of competition and the market will ensure that Apple cannot sustain its domination unchecked. Regulators will likely become increasingly interested in investigating Apple’s practice, as evidenced by recent hearings in the European Union, and it is possible that a court ruling or legislation could alter Apple’s App Store policies. In addition, conduct rules may be introduced to further restrict anti-competitive behaviour and enhance consumer welfare.
In any case, competition will always be at work within the ever-evolving App Store environment, pushing prices down and improving user experiences. Moreover, through its sheer size and clout, Apple can already wield significant power over rivals on its platform. This power comes with certain advantages but also certain responsibilities. In conclusion, it would then appear well worth monitoring developments at the App Store closely not only for their implications for competitive practices but also for their effect on consumers.
tags = apple app store, epic games inc, epic games lawsuit against apple, ios app store, us antitrust enforcers, ios security defense appeal, epic apple app store applegurmanbloomberg, epic apple applegurmanbloomberg, epic app applegurmanbloomberg, market mobile application, us district court