US judge allows antitrust lawsuit against Apple to proceed
PTI
New Jersey, Jun 30 (AP) A federal judge on Monday rebuffed Apple's request to throw out a US government lawsuit alleging the technology trendsetter has built a maze of illegal barriers to protect the iPhone from competition and fatten its profit margins.
The 33-page opinion from US District Judge Xavier Neals in New Jersey will enable an antitrust lawsuit that the US Justice Department filed against Apple 15 months ago to proceed.
Neals has set a timetable that could see the case come to trial in 2027.
Apple has sought to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing the Justice Department had distorted the contours of the smartphone market and made a series of other misinterpretations that warranted the case be thrown out.
But Neals decided there is enough evidence to support the Justice Department's market definitions and concluded the case's key allegations merited further examination at trial.
The case seeks to pierce the digital fortress that Apple Inc, based in Cupertino, California, has built around the iPhone, iPad and other products to create a so-called 'walled garden" allowing its hardware and software to mesh seamlessly for users.
The Justice Department alleges that walled garden has mostly turned into a shield against competition, creating market conditions that enable it to charge higher prices and stifle innovation.
The lawsuit 'sets forth several allegations of technological barricades that constitute anticompetitive conduct," Neals wrote in his opinion.
The judge also concluded the Justice Department had pointed toward enough areas of troubling conduct that raised the 'dangerous possibility" that Apple has turned the iPhone into an illegal monopoly.
In a Monday statement, Apple reiterated its position that the Justice Department's case 'is wrong on the facts and the law, and we will continue to vigorously fight it in court".
The antitrust lawsuit isn't the only legal headache threatening to undercut its profits, which totalled USD 94 billion on sales of USD 295 billion in its fiscal year ending last September.
Another federal judge in April issued a civil contempt order banning Apple from collecting any fees from in-app transactions on the iPhone that are funnelled through other options besides its once-exclusive payment processing system that charged commissions ranging from 15 to 30 per cent.
Apple also could lose a more than $20 billion annual payment that it gets for making Google the default search tool on the iPhone and other products as part of another antitrust case brought by the Justice Department.
A federal judge in Washington is considering whether to ban the deals with Apple as part of a shake-up being proposed to address Google's illegal monopoly in search.
Neals' decision to allow the Justice Department's antitrust case to proceed came on the same day that Apple was hit with a lawsuit by app maker Proton amplifying the accusations of wrongful conduct by the company.
The lawsuit, which will seek to be certified as a class action presenting thousands of developers who have made iPhone apps, is asking for punitive damages against Apple, as well as a court order to dismantle its walled garden. (AP) ARI
First Published:
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
11 minutes ago
- Mint
Google ordered to pay over $314 million to Android users in California for ‘stealing' mobile data
Google has been ordered to pay over $314.6 million to Android smartphone users in California after a state court in San Jose ruled in favour of the plaintiffs in a class-action lawsuit. The jury agreed with claims that Google was liable for sending and receiving information from Android devices without users' permission while the devices were idle. According to the lawsuit, this amounted to 'mandatory and unavoidable burdens shouldered by Android device users for Google's benefit.' The suit further claimed that Google programmed Android phones to transfer data to its servers when users were not connected to a Wi-Fi network, effectively using data that customers were paying for. The tech giant allegedly used this information 'to further its own corporate interests,' including building more targeted digital advertising and expanding its mapping credibility, the lawsuit states. The class-action lawsuit was filed in 2019 in Santa Clara Superior Court on behalf of California residents. A parallel federal case is pending for Android users across the United States, with a trial scheduled to begin in early 2026, Bloomberg reported. 'This ruling is a setback for users, as it misunderstands services that are critical to the security, performance, and reliability of Android devices,' Google's José Castañeda was quoted by Bloomberg as saying. Castañeda further noted that the transfers discussed in the case are necessary to maintain the performance of billions of Android devices worldwide and that they consume less cellular data than sending a single photo. He stated that Android users consent to such transfers through multiple terms of use agreements and device setting options. Notably, this case is only one of several legal challenges facing the search giant in its home country. Last year, a federal judge ruled in favour of the United States government in its anti-monopoly case against Google. The Department of Justice has argued that Google's monopoly can be ended by breaking up its different products, including Chrome browser, Search and Android.
Indian Express
14 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Landmark EU tech rules holding back innovation, Google says
Alphabet's Google will on Tuesday warn EU antitrust regulators and its critics that landmark European Union rules aimed at reining in Big Tech are hampering innovation to the detriment of European users and businesses. The U.S. tech giant will also urge regulators to give more detailed guidance to help it comply with the rules, and ask its critics to provide evidence of costs and benefits to prove their case. Google is under pressure to address charges under the EU's Digital Markets Act that it favours its own services such as Google Shopping, Google Hotels and Google Flights over rivals. The charges may result in fines of as much as 10% of its global annual revenue. Earlier this month, Google proposed more changes to its search results to better showcase rival products, but critics say these still do not ensure a level playing field. 'We remain genuinely concerned about real world consequences of the DMA, which are leading to worse online products and experiences for Europeans,' Google's lawyer Clare Kelly will tell a workshop organised by the European Commission to give Google critics the opportunity to seek clarifications. She will say changes implemented by Google to date after discussions with the Commission and its critics have resulted in European users paying more for travel tickets as they cannot directly access airline sites, according to a copy of her speech seen by Reuters. Kelly will also say European airlines, hotels and restaurants have reported up to a 30% loss in direct booking traffic, while users have complained about clunky workarounds. Google's other lawyer, Oliver Bethell, will ask regulators to spell out in detail what the company needs to do, and critics to come up with hard evidence. 'If we can understand precisely what compliance looks like, not just in theory, but taking account of on the ground experience, we can launch compliant services quickly and confidently across the EEA,' he will say. The EEA is the 27 EU countries, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway. 'We need help identifying the areas where we should focus. That means bringing real evidence of costs and benefits that we can take account of with the Commission,' Bethell said. The day-long workshop starts at 0700 GMT.
Time of India
17 minutes ago
- Time of India
Cloudflare launches tool to help website owners monetise AI bot crawler access
Cloudflare has launched a tool that blocks bot crawlers from accessing content without permission or compensation to help websites make money from AI firms trying to access and train on their content, the software company said on Tuesday. The tool allows website owners to choose whether artificial intelligence crawlers can access their material and set a price for access through a "pay per crawl" model, which will help them control how their work is used and compensated, Cloudflare said. With AI crawlers increasingly collecting content without sending visitors to the original source, website owners are looking to develop additional revenue sources as search traffic referrals that once generated advertising revenue decline. The initiative is supported by major publishers including Conde Nast and Associated Press, as well as social media companies such as Reddit and Pinterest. Cloudflare's Chief Strategy Officer Stephanie Cohen said the goal of such tools was to give publishers control over their content, and ensure a sustainable ecosystem for online content creators and AI companies . "The change in traffic patterns has been rapid, and something needed to change," Cohen said in an interview. "This is just the beginning of a new model for the internet." Google, for example, has seen its ratio of crawls to visitors referred back to sites drop to 18:1 from 6:1 just six months ago, according to Cloudflare data, suggesting the search giant is maintaining its crawling but decreasing referrals. The decline could be a result of users finding answers directly within Google's search results, such as AI Overviews. Still, Google's ratio is much higher than other AI companies, such as OpenAI's 1,500:1. For decades, search engines have indexed content on the internet directing users back to websites, an approach that rewards creators for producing quality content. However, AI companies' crawlers have disrupted this model because they harvest material without sending visitors to the original source and aggregate information through chatbots such as ChatGPT, depriving creators of revenue and recognition. Many AI companies are circumventing a common web standard used by publishers to block the scraping of their content for use in AI systems, and argue they have broken no laws in accessing content for free. In response, some publishers, including the New York Times, have sued AI companies for copyright infringement , while others have struck deals to license their content. Reddit, for example, has sued AI startup Anthropic for allegedly scraping Reddit user comments to train its AI chatbot, while inking a content licensing deal with Google.
