Supreme Court Rules Against Apple In App Store Antitrust Suit

WASHINGTON, May 13 (Reuters) ― The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday gave the go-ahead for a lawsuit by consumers accusing Apple Inc of monopolizing the market for iPhone software applications and forcing them to overpay, rejecting the company’s bid to escape claims that its practices violate federal antitrust law.

Apple shares fell more than 5% after the justices, in a 5-4 ruling, upheld a lower court’s decision to allow the proposed class action lawsuit to proceed. The plaintiffs said the Cupertino, California-based technology company required apps be sold through its App Store and extracted an excessive 30 percent commission on purchases.

Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh, an appointee of President Donald Trump, joined the court’s four liberal justices to rule against Apple and wrote the decision.


Recommended PRODUCTS
  • Don't Pay Taxes You Don't Owe Most Pay Is NOT Taxable Find Out Now.
  • Learn how you can easily create mobile apps to generate passive income.
  • Unleash Your Brain's Power Master ESP, Astral Projection, Manifestation, and More GUARANTEED RESULTS In Minutes
  • Are you frustrated that your expensive karoke player does not let you play.
  • Got A Ticket, Need It To Go Away We Beats Tickets Using The Court Rules Against Itself.
  • Learn How To Build Your Own Iron Man Suit Armor Costume and Become The Next Tony Stark
  • Shows You How To Get and Stay Hard Naturally
  • How to create an iphone or ipad apps and games succeed in app store
  • Why most violinists actually get it wrong - and how you can get it right.
  • Trader on Chart is a special tool designed for manual Forex trading on MT4 platform.
  • Make Money Online With This Pre-Loaded Wordpress eBook Store.
  • 5 Simple Conversation Hacks That Let You Get Any Girl on Tinder
  • Apple cider vinegar secrets reveled. This can change your life.
  • By strictly following our tried and tested rules, you can expect a very high win rate
  • Clickbank Ads
     

    Apple shares were trading down more than $10 at $186.84 by mid-morning.

    Explaining the ruling from the bench, Kavanaugh said, “Leaving consumers at the mercy of monopolistic retailers simply because upstream suppliers could also sue the retailers would directly contradict the longstanding goal of effective private enforcement in antitrust cases.”

    The company, backed by the Trump administration, argued that it was only acting as an agent for app developers, who set their own prices and pay Apple’s commission. Apple had argued that a Supreme Court ruling allowing the case to proceed could pose a threat to e-commerce, a rapidly expanding segment of the U.S. economy worth hundreds of billions of dollars in annual sales.

    The dispute hinged in part on how the justices would apply a decision the court made in 1977 to the claims against Apple. In that case, the court limited damages for anti-competitive conduct to those directly overcharged rather than indirect victims who paid an overcharge passed on by others.

    Noting that they pay Apple ― not an app developer ― whenever buying an app from the App Store, the iPhone users who brought the case said they were direct victims of the overcharges. Apple said the consumers were indirect purchasers, at best, because any overcharge would be passed on to them by developers.

    Developers earned more than $26 billion in 2017, a 30 percent increase over 2016, according to Apple.

    The plaintiffs, including lead plaintiff Robert Pepper of Chicago, filed the suit in a California federal court in 2011, claiming Apple’s monopoly leads to inflated prices compared to if apps were available from other sources. They were supported by 30 state attorneys general, including from Texas, California and New York.

    Apple, which was also backed by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce business group, sought to dismiss the case, arguing that the plaintiffs lacked the required legal standing to bring the lawsuit.

    After a federal judge in Oakland, California threw out the suit, the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals revived it in 2017, finding that Apple was a distributor that sold iPhone apps directly to consumers.

    (Reporting by Andrew Chung; Editing by Will Dunham)

    Original Article : HERE ; This post was curated & posted using : RealSpecific

     


    RELATED PRODUCTS
  • Learn how you can easily create mobile apps to generate passive income.
  • Don't Pay Taxes You Don't Owe Most Pay Is NOT Taxable Find Out Now.
  • Shows You How To Get and Stay Hard Naturally
  • Trader on Chart is a special tool designed for manual Forex trading on MT4 platform.
  • Why most violinists actually get it wrong - and how you can get it right.
  • 5 Simple Conversation Hacks That Let You Get Any Girl on Tinder
  • How to create an iphone or ipad apps and games succeed in app store
  • Apple cider vinegar secrets reveled. This can change your life.
  • Are you frustrated that your expensive karoke player does not let you play.
  • Unleash Your Brain's Power Master ESP, Astral Projection, Manifestation, and More GUARANTEED RESULTS In Minutes
  • Learn How To Build Your Own Iron Man Suit Armor Costume and Become The Next Tony Stark
  • Make Money Online With This Pre-Loaded Wordpress eBook Store.
  • Got A Ticket, Need It To Go Away We Beats Tickets Using The Court Rules Against Itself.
  • Kitchens,bathroom Designs,house Designs And Home Improvement
  • Clickbank Ads
     

    Thank you for taking the time to read our article.

    If you enjoyed our content, we'd really appreciate some "love" with a share or two.

    And ... Don't forget to have fun!

    Recommended

    VideoCrate Value Deal Unlimited Sites

    VideoCrate Value Deal -- Four top-selling video apps for the price of one! Unlimited site license.

    Vizully DIAMOND Pro

    Vizully DIAMOND Edition. Significantly BOOST Your Traffic With Fortune 500 SECRET Technology For MASSIVE Clicks and Conversions.

    Leave a Reply