Apple loses bid to dismiss US smartphone monopoly case
U.S. District Judge Julien Neals in Newark, New Jersey, denied Apple's motion to dismiss the lawsuit accusing the company of using restrictions on third-party app and device developers to keep users from switching to competitors and unlawfully dominate the market.
The decision would allow the case to go forward in what could be a years-long fight for Apple against enforcers' attempt to lower what they say are barriers to competition with Apple's iPhone.
Sales of the world's most popular smartphone totaled $201 billion in 2024. Apple introduced a new
budget model
iPhone in February with enhanced features priced at $170 more than its predecessor.
The lawsuit filed in March 2024 focuses on Apple's restrictions and fees on app developers, and technical roadblocks to third-party devices and services -- such as smart watches, digital wallets and messaging services -- that would compete with its own.
DOJ, along with several states and Washington, D.C., say the practices destroy competition and Apple should be blocked from continuing them.
Apple had argued that its limitations on third-party developers' access to its technology were reasonable, and that forcing it to share technology with competitors would chill innovation.
The case is one of a series of U.S. antitrust cases against Big Tech companies brought during the Biden and first Trump administrations.
Facebook parent Meta Platforms (META.O), opens new tab and Amazon.com (AMZN.O), opens new tab are facing lawsuits by antitrust enforcers alleging they illegally maintain monopolies, and Alphabet's (GOOGL.O), opens new tab is facing two such lawsuits.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
15 minutes ago
- The Guardian
What's in Trump's big, beautiful bill? Tax cuts, deportations and more
Senate Republicans on Tuesday passed Donald Trump's massive tax and spending bill after spending all night voting on amendments. The bill, which the GOP has dubbed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, now returns to the House of Representatives, which passed their version last month, ahead of a Friday deadline the president has imposed for the legislation to be on his desk. Here's what's in the Senate's version of the bill: After taking office in 2017, Trump signed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which lowered taxes and increased the standard deduction for all taxpayers, but generally benefited high earners more than most. Those provisions are set to expire after this year, but the big, beautiful bill makes them permanent, while increasing the standard deduction by $1,000 for individuals, $1,500 for heads of households and $2,000 for married couples, albeit only through 2028. The bill has an array of new tax write-offs – but only while Trump is president. Several of the new exemptions stem from promises Trump made while campaigning last year. Taxpayers will be able to write off income from tips and overtime, and interest made on loans to purchase cars assembled in the United States. People aged 65 and over are eligible for an additional deduction of $6,000, provided their adjusted gross income does not exceed $75,000 for single filers or $150,000 for couples. But all of these incentives expire at the end of 2028, right before Trump's term as president ends. As part of Trump's plan to remove undocumented immigrants from the country, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) will receive $45bn for detention facilities, $14bn for deportation operations and billions of dollars more to hire an additional 10,000 new agents by 2029. More than $50bn is allocated for the construction of new border fortifications, which will probably include a wall along the border with Mexico. Republicans have attempted to cut down on the bill's cost by slashing two major federal safety net programs: Medicaid, which provides healthcare to poor and disabled Americans, and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (Snap), which helps people afford groceries. Both are in for funding cuts, as well as new work requirements. The left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates the Medicaid changes could cost as many as 10.6 million people their healthcare, and about eight million people, or one in five recipients, their Snap benefits. The bill will phase out many tax incentives created by Congress during Joe Biden's presidency meant to encourage consumers and businesses to use electric vehicles and other clean energy technology. Credits for cleaner cars will end this year, as will subsidies for Americans seeking to upgrade their homes to cleaner or more energy efficient appliances. While a draft of the bill targeted wind and solar energy projects with a new excise tax, senators voted to remove that at the last minute. One of the thorniest issues the bill addresses is how much relief to provide from state and local taxes (Salt), which many Americans must also pay in addition to their federal tax. Several House Republicans representing districts in Democrat-led states withheld their support from the bill until the Salt deductibility cap was raised from $10,000 to $40,000, but Senate Republicans made clear they would change that. The Senate's version keeps the $40,000 cap, but only through 2028. The bill will increase the US government's authority to borrow, known as the debt limit, by $5tn. The US treasury secretary, Scott Bessent, has predicted the government will hit the limit by August, at which point it could default on its debt and spark a financial crisis. Wealthier taxpayers appear set to receive more benefits from this bill than poorer ones, according to The Budget Lab at Yale University. Taxpayers in the lowest income quintile will see a 2.5% decrease in their incomes, largely due to the Snap and Medicaid cuts, while the highest earners will see their incomes grow by 2.4%, the Budget Lab estimated. The impact could change based on what amendments the Senate adopts. Despite the GOP's attempts to use the bill as a vehicle to rein in government spending, the bill would increase the deficit by $3.3tn through 2034, according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office. Most of that price tag is the extension of the 2017 tax cuts. The heavy budgetary impact could complicate the bill's chances of passing the House, where fiscal hardliners have demanded budget deficit reductions.
Daily Mail
19 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Perfume expert reveals if Trump's fragrances are worth it
Donald Trump has launched two new fragrances... but are the scents really worth the hefty price tag? On Monday, Trump unveiled a new fragrance called VICTORY 45-47, offering an option for men and women both encased in an elaborate gold Trump statue. Trump, 79, announced the fragrances on his Truth Social platform and said, 'The Victory 45-47 scents ― one for men, one for women ― sell for $249 per 100ml bottle, with a $50 discount per bottle for those who purchase two or more.' The product description calls the limited-edition, numbered rose gold statue perfume 'a stunning new women's fragrance inspired by President Trump's historic win' that's 'perfect for the Trump fan and collector.' 'With every spray, Victory 47 captures confidence, beauty, and unstoppable determination,' the description promises, calling it 'a sophisticated, subtly feminine scent that's your go-to signature for any occasion,' without providing any scent notes. To find out if the fragrances are worth the high price, FEMAIL consulted a fragrance expert and a PR pro. Much like the perfume option, the men's fragrance is just as vague. It's described as blending 'rich, masculine notes with a refined, lasting finish,' with no insight into what it actually smells like. The product breakdown boasts: 'For men who lead with strength, confidence, and purpose — this is more than a cologne, it's a celebration of resilience and success.' Mark Crames, CEO and chief perfumer at Demeter Fragrance , told that while 'there are certainly $200 fragrances out there, they tend to be associated with niche or historically top fragrance houses who use fine ingredients and know how to use them,' and 'this looks like a cheap private label from overseas.' Crames said he 'would assume it's a very non-offensive typical lower end designer fragrance' based on the limited description. 'Some higher priced use precious ingredients that justify their price and are sold in very limited distribution at exceedingly higher prices. This is not that,' Crames explained. 'Most commercial designer fragrances are driven by packaging and marketing, not scent. In that sense, the Trump fragrances fit right in. What it actually smells like has little do do with its allure,' Crames continued. Many perfumes cost upwards of $200, with some going for thousands of dollars. 'There is nothing here to distinguish the fragrance in an olfactory sense - it's about owning a piece of the Trump empire. This is very much like buying a Gucci fragrance for $75 because the $3,000 leather pants are out of reach,' Crames added. Trump has previously offered pricier products, like his $100,000 signed gold watches . This isn't the first time the politician has offered MAGA-inspired fragrances to his fans. Last year, Trump sold a $199 Fight, Fight, Fight set, that was named after what he said during his assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania. Public relations professional Barry Schwartz told 'I'm not a fragrance expert, but do have considerable expertise in ethics, and this latest Trump gambit doesn't pass the smell test.' Schwartz, based in New York, believes 'it's just another example of selling the presidency.' Trump is promoting the fragrances and would probably be receiving a large licensing fee. However, a note on the website states: 'Trump Fragrances are not designed, manufactured, distributed or sold by Donald J. Trump, the Trump Organization or any of their respective affiliates or principals.'
Daily Mail
33 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Why are Donald Trump's new fragrances so expensive? Perfume expert reveals if the scents are REALLY worth it
Donald Trump has launched two new fragrances... but are the scents really worth the hefty price tag? On Monday, Trump unveiled a new fragrance called VICTORY 45-47, offering an option for men and women both encased in an elaborate gold Trump statue. Trump, 79, announced the fragrances on his Truth Social platform and said, 'The Victory 45-47 scents ― one for men, one for women ― sell for $249 per 100ml bottle, with a $50 discount per bottle for those who purchase two or more.' The product description calls the limited-edition, numbered rose gold statue perfume 'a stunning new women's fragrance inspired by President Trump's historic win' that's 'perfect for the Trump fan and collector.' 'With every spray, Victory 47 captures confidence, beauty, and unstoppable determination,' the description promises, calling it 'a sophisticated, subtly feminine scent that's your go-to signature for any occasion,' without providing any scent notes. To find out if the fragrances are worth the high price, FEMAIL consulted a fragrance expert and a PR pro. Much like the perfume option, the men's fragrance is just as vague. It's described as blending 'rich, masculine notes with a refined, lasting finish,' with no insight into what it actually smells like. The product breakdown boasts: 'For men who lead with strength, confidence, and purpose — this is more than a cologne, it's a celebration of resilience and success.' Mark Crames, CEO and chief perfumer at Demeter Fragrance, told that while 'there are certainly $200 fragrances out there, they tend to be associated with niche or historically top fragrance houses who use fine ingredients and know how to use them,' and 'this looks like a cheap private label from overseas.' Crames said he 'would assume it's a very non-offensive typical lower end designer fragrance' based on the limited description. 'Some higher priced use precious ingredients that justify their price and are sold in very limited distribution at exceedingly higher prices. This is not that,' Crames explained. 'Most commercial designer fragrances are driven by packaging and marketing, not scent. In that sense, the Trump fragrances fit right in. What it actually smells like has little do do with its allure,' Crames continued. Many perfumes cost upwards of $200, with some going for thousands of dollars. 'There is nothing here to distinguish the fragrance in an olfactory sense - it's about owning a piece of the Trump empire. This is very much like buying a Gucci fragrance for $75 because the $3,000 leather pants are out of reach,' Crames added. Trump has previously offered pricier products, like his $100,000 signed gold watches. This isn't the first time the politician has offered MAGA-inspired fragrances to his fans. Last year, Trump sold a $199 Fight, Fight, Fight set, that was named after what he said during his assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania. Public relations professional Barry Schwartz told 'I'm not a fragrance expert, but do have considerable expertise in ethics, and this latest Trump gambit doesn't pass the smell test.' Schwartz, based in New York, believes 'it's just another example of selling the presidency.' Trump is promoting the fragrances and would probably be receiving a large licensing fee. However, a note on the website states: 'Trump Fragrances are not designed, manufactured, distributed or sold by Donald J. Trump, the Trump Organization or any of their respective affiliates or principals.'
