The Justice Department and attorney generals from 16 different states claimed on March 21 that Apple is illegally monopolizing the smartphone market.
This marks another significant legal battle in the world of technology, compared with the government’s 1990s lawsuit against Microsoft. The Apple case revolves specifically around how Apple has used its iPhone ecosystem to build a monopoly in the U.S. This is the third time the DOJ has sued Apple for antitrust violations in the past 14 years. This time, I think Apple will win.
A monopoly is defined as one singular company that produces and sells a given product or service. University of Chiago law professor Randy Picker told Yahoo Finance Live, “My guess is [Apple] will win.”
Even if the company has no success in the first-filed case in New Jersey federal court, Picker thinks Apple will succeed on appeals, possibly to the Supreme Court.
“Yes, I think that Apple will prevail in the end.”
Apple does not have a monopoly over the smartphone market; it simply engages in anti-competitive behaviors. While Apple holds a very, very large share of the smartphone market, it does not dominate it entirely. Sure, as of December 2023, Apple has the biggest chunk of the pie, a whopping 61.3%, to be specific. But if we are talking about this economically, a “monopolist” commands 100% of a properly defined market. This means that, in the eyes of the consumer, there are no substitutes for smartphones. Competitors like Samsung and Google (Pixel) offer many alternative smartphone options to consumers; most consumers choose for themselves to go with Apple, maybe because it’s just better?
The smartphone market in the U.S. is highly competitive; various manufacturers and operating systems are available for people to choose from. If we are trying to call Apple a “true” monopoly, then we must think of Apple beyond smartphones, it faces competition in other markets, including computers, tablets, wearables and services. I think this really just boils down to the consumer’s choice. Apple products are just popular, and there are reasons for this.
The company’s success stems from their smart business strategies and their role in changing technology as we know it today. One of the main “monopoly” concerns would be Apple’s control over apps and services available on their devices.
For example, Apple does not allow other browser engines to be used on iOS devices without using Apple’s own Webkit engine, i.e., Safari. That includes large, third-party web browsers, such as Chrome from Google. And sure, this might sound super rude when promoting other tech companies through Apple, but thinking of it from a monopoly stance, this is a specific illustration of how the company’s policies limit consumers choice and innovation.
If you do not want to use Apple’s Webkit, no worries, get a different smartphone, we have others to choose from! But let’s say, for example, that you are comparing an iPad to another type of tablet device from another tech brand, they are kind of disappointing. I mean, Apple seems to be the only company that still puts effort into the tablet market, constantly improving iPads and Apple Pencils and their capabilities.
But, I know, the lawsuit is for the smartphone industry specifically, but the two go hand in hand. Is it really a monopoly if consumers are genuinely picking the company for better quality and use?
Apple is jacking up their prices and adding little nick-nacks left and right that we are supposed to buy. People are saying a monopoly starts when people become reliant on the product and charging more is an example of corporate abuse. Hey, you may be right, the iPhone is basically a billion dollars in my eyes, they might be abusing that, but that doesn’t make them a monopoly.
If I get upset that Apple is charging an outrageous amount of money for my phone, I have the option to change. I, along with the rest of the Apple users, simply don’t want to.
Presley Zimmerman can be reached at [email protected]