The Upgrade
Apple’s App Store Is the Monopoly You Want
It’s not perfect, but neither is the case against it
Class-action lawsuits do not always represent the will or best interest of the people. Such is the case with Apple Inc. v. Pepper, a several years old antitrust case against Apple that simply refuses to die. A loss for Apple in this case would mean greater confusion and worse options for consumers on iOS.
Some quick background: In 2011, Robert Pepper and a few other iPhone customers sued Apple, alleging it was monopolizing control of the app market via the iOS App Store. If you have an iPhone, that App Store is the only way to purchase and download new apps without jailbreaking your device. As the lawsuit sees it, Apple used that control to essentially force a 30 percent markup on all paid apps because the company takes a 30 percent commission on each App Store transaction. This commision makes apps on iOS more expensive than they would otherwise be in an open app market, the argument goes.
Initially, that case didn’t go so well. A district court ruled in favor of Apple, which argued that while it offers apps on behalf of developers, those developers are the ones setting the prices and putting them up for sale in the iOS App Store. Though Apple may take a commission on the sale of apps and…
