Antitrust suit alleging App Store monopoly tossed due to procedural blunder
A lawsuit claiming Apple has a monopoly over apps sold through the iTunes App Store was thrown out on Thursday, with plaintiffs found to lack grounds for complaint as they had never purchased the apps in question.
The procedural misstep, which prompted U.S. District Court Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers to grant Apple's motion to dismiss the case, will likely be only a brief respite as the complaint can simply be amended and refiled, reports Bloomberg.
Plaintiffs did not prove ?collective allegations that they have been deprived of lower cost alternatives, paid higher prices for Apple-approved applications, or had their iPhones disabled or destroyed," Judge Gonzales said in her order. "At a minimum, plaintiffs must allege facts showing that each named plaintiff has personally suffered an injury-in-fact based on Apple?s alleged conduct.?
The suit was first leveled against in 2011 and accuses Apple of conducting monopolistic practices by creating an ecosystem in which apps are only available through the App Store. Further, Apple's 30 percent cut of each sale inflates the price of apps, while the company disallows competition in the way of third-party alternatives.
In its March motion to dismiss, Apple pointed out that it does not set prices for apps sold through the App Store, nor are there laws against charging a percentage of proceeds for distribution.
Despite Thursday's setback, lawyer for the plaintiffs Alexander Schmidt said the judge's requirements are easily met, suggesting the group will refile in the near future.
The procedural misstep, which prompted U.S. District Court Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers to grant Apple's motion to dismiss the case, will likely be only a brief respite as the complaint can simply be amended and refiled, reports Bloomberg.
Plaintiffs did not prove ?collective allegations that they have been deprived of lower cost alternatives, paid higher prices for Apple-approved applications, or had their iPhones disabled or destroyed," Judge Gonzales said in her order. "At a minimum, plaintiffs must allege facts showing that each named plaintiff has personally suffered an injury-in-fact based on Apple?s alleged conduct.?
The suit was first leveled against in 2011 and accuses Apple of conducting monopolistic practices by creating an ecosystem in which apps are only available through the App Store. Further, Apple's 30 percent cut of each sale inflates the price of apps, while the company disallows competition in the way of third-party alternatives.
In its March motion to dismiss, Apple pointed out that it does not set prices for apps sold through the App Store, nor are there laws against charging a percentage of proceeds for distribution.
Despite Thursday's setback, lawyer for the plaintiffs Alexander Schmidt said the judge's requirements are easily met, suggesting the group will refile in the near future.
Comments
I dont see how real customers could possibly waste time on that kind of lawsuit. This has to be paid by Google, Samsung or Amazon...
otherwise, well, welcome to retarded land.
There are plenty of free apps on the App Store. If you think an app is too expensive, find one you can afford.
Sign up at : STFU.com
The ios app store is the reason applications are so cheap. Are these idiot plaintiffs being injured by paying $0.99 for an app?
Same with Sony, and Nintendo.
Quote:
Originally Posted by starbird73
Can I sue Microsoft? I can only get Xbox apps through my Xbox.
This
Quote:
Originally Posted by WonkoTheSane
These kind of lawsuits always make me angry. I make a product. I sell the product. You don't like it or how I chose to sell it? Fine. Just don't buy it.
I would amend by saying unless you are a monopoly (ie, like Windows was) which you are leveraging in an inappropriate way. But that would require that the iPhone be declared a market onto itself, which it's not. It's part of the smartphone market, and Apple is nowhere near a monopoly in that market. So I think these guys can amend their lawsuit if they want, but it still isn't going anywhere because there are plenty of other smartphones with comparable options for apps (now settle down Fanboys...I said "comparable", not "on par with" LOL)
Oh dang.
I was going to sue Honda for having a monopoly on Honda Civics.
So much for that idea.
I am suing Appleinsider.com for only reporting Apple related news.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightstriker
I am suing Appleinsider.com for only reporting Apple related news.
Those days are long gone unfortunately.