It’s no secret that the U.S. government has been targeting Big Tech for their control over consumers. Google and Facebook have been the focus of past investigations that are still ongoing, and now, it seems the feds are doing the same with Apple. A U.S. antitrust case against Apple was just filed that not only involved the feds, but also 16 other states. The briefing alleges that the multi-trillion-dollar company is purposefully involved in anticompetitive behaviors detrimental to consumers. With the U.S. suing Apple, it’s even more clear that a focus to curb Big Tech’s power is in the works.
(Revisit the government’s antitrust efforts against Facebook in this Bold story.)
Of course, the U.S. antitrust case against Apple isn’t the first in which Apple has had to defend itself. Other countries have also gone after the company and its policies in legal forums. Are these efforts fair and just? On the one hand, a real monopoly situation could well suppress innovation and undermine consumer value. But at the same time, companies have the right to create policies that enable them to best compete in the marketplace. The U.S. suing Apple highlights this debate and could help better clarify when an antitrust line is being crossed.
The Fed’s Allegations Against Apple
The U.S. antitrust case against Apple represents a lawsuit that’s been in the works since 2019. Investigations into the company’s monopoly-like behaviors have been extensive as the five-year search suggests. As noted, not only are federal agencies like the Justice Department and Federal Trade Commission involve but so are many states. This includes the District of Columbia. The alleged claim in the lawsuit is that Apple has established rules and policies that insulates itself from competition. This particularly true when it comes to smartphone apps and access to Apple Pay’s technologies. The end result, according to the U.S. suing Apple, is detriment to the market and consumers. This includes fewer product choices, higher prices, lower quality services, and reduced innovation.
In detailing the specifics in the U.S. suing Apple, several claims have been made. For one, Apple has been accused of preventing rivals from accessing core features of its products and services. It also has been cited for limiting access to its Bluetooth tracker from other apps and services, and it also does not allow others to use its NFC payment chip that underlies its Apple Pay system.
Other issues relate to Apple not allowing cloud-streaming apps on its platform as well as a host of rules for app developers to follow. And finally, the U.S. antitrust case against Apple points out that Apple allows much easier connections among its devices that it permits outside companies. According to the brief, it is precisely these policies that have allowed Apple to dominate the app and smartphone device market.
Apple’s Rebuttal to the Allegations
Naturally, Apple hardly agrees with the current U.S. antitrust case against Apple filed recently. And like Google, Microsoft, and Facebook, it too plans to fight back against the U.S. suing Apple. At the heart of its perspective, Apple states is has a legitimate right to adopt policies and rules that make user experiences better. Specifically, by blocking cloud streaming apps, the company cites security and privacy protections for consumers. The same Apple says is true of its policies regarding its financial chip in its Apple Pay platform. By limiting access to these aspects of its platforms, Apple believes it is enhancing customer value. Regardless of whether rivals and opposition disagree, it has the right to invest in these types of actions.
Apple also states it has not limited innovation and consumer choice but instead actually augmented it. In the last decade alone, Apple has fueled the development of millions of new businesses. This includes an increase in smartphone and device apps by 374% during this time. Over five million apps now exist on its platforms, which Apple says supports its claims. Of course, those involved in the U.S. antitrust case against Apple don’t agree. They believe growth would have been even more substantial without Apple’s tight control and restrictive rules. Clearly, there are divergent points of view that are being exposed with the U.S. suing Apple. And proving which side is right could be difficult.
(Apple’s innovative products have helped shape the 21st Century–read how in this Bold story.)
A Small Part of the Larger Picture
The U.S. antitrust case against Apple isn’t the first or likely to be the last. From a business perspective, Apple has survived a lawsuit from Epic Games that claimed monopoly behaviors as well. Epic cited the requirement to use Apple devices and payment systems as evidence of this. But Apple won that suit again citing the need to protect consumer privacy and security while preventing malware and fraud. This same issue is or has been addressed in court in Europe, South Korea, and the Netherlands. Apple has already been fined by the EU for not letting app developers use other payment alternatives, and countries like Britain, Japan, and Australia hope to pass laws requiring Apple to allow super-apps and streaming-apps onto its platforms. The U.S. suing Apple isn’t an isolated case, but reflective of a global shift.
When it comes to this specific U.S. antitrust case against Apple, most suspect it will take several years to resolve. Based on the speed with which technologies advance, a lot could change in that period of time. The use of generative AI is one such area advancing at rapid pace, which will undoubtedly be a game changer. Therefore, it’s unclear not only the end result of the U.S. suing Apple but the impact on the company in the future. In any case, the drama unfolding shows that a gray zone remains between competitive policies and antitrust behaviors exists. It will be interesting to see exactly how this all plays out in the years to come.
U.S. child labor violations are on the rise–read about it in this Bold story.
