Would this apply to the Google Play store?
The wise wolf who's pride is her wisdom isn't so sharp as drunk.
The heart of this ruling is that the Supreme Court is declaring that digital purchases don't magically follow a different set of laws than physical ones.
What I mean by this is that if you go to Gamestop and buy a copy of Breath of the Wild, you are considered to be purchasing the game from Gamestop, not from Nintendo. Nintendo sells the game to Gamestop, Gamestop sells it to you. If you open up the case and a bunch of bees fly out rather than there being a cartridge, you then can legally demand redress from Gamestop for selling it to you. Gamestop then can go and demand redress from Nintendo if they want, but that step has nothing to do with you as a consumer.
This ruling says that the iphone app store works similarly. The developers are selling their game to Apple, who in turn sells it to you. Therefore you have the legal right to seek redress from Apple for it's behavior. It does NOT say that Apple has actually done anything wrong, simply that it does have legal responsibility and can be challenged in a court of law. The next step will be to say that the fact that the only entity allowed to sell on Apple products being Apple itself violates antitrust laws, but that court case is upcoming and has not been decided yet. (That being said, given the precedent of the antitrust suit on Microsoft, I do not envy Apple's chances on getting out of it easily)
As for Kavanaugh being the swing vote, I'm not sure that this topic is really an ideological pillar of either side, so I wouldn't read a lot into it.
Last edited by Lynarii; 2019-05-15 at 04:05 PM.
Can you not crack an iPhone and put what ever apps you want on it?
I don't know much about iPhones as I'm an actual software developer and I would never use an apple product because I like having a real job.
It is possible to crack an iPhone and put other apps on it. According to Apple this is an illegal copyright infringement, though I have not heard of Apple actually going after anyone for doing so.
Most importantly though, the ability of people to circumvent a restriction does not make that restriction legal. You can get around any monopoly if you try hard enough and are willing to bend (or break) some laws. What is important is whether the average person can or should be required to do so. Just because it may be easy for some individuals to jailbreak a device and install bootleg software onto it doesn't make that a reasonable option for everyone using an iPhone.
It's a good start. Apple forcing iOS users to the app store is indeed an attempt to establish a monopoly.
Consider if you want to digitally buy a game on Windows. Perhaps you go to Steam. Perhaps you go to Green Man Gaming. Perhaps you get it from GOG, or G2A if you're comfortable with greymarket purchases. Perhaps you decide to use one of the many other services available.
With iOS, you don't get a choice. If you want software, you have to buy it from Apple's store.
This is different from exclusives on consoles (the developer of the software has the right to developer for a specific platform if they choose) and it is different from console digital sales because we can purchase physical media as an alternative. The moment console games are digital purchases only and can only be bought from the manufacturer's store, they'll have crossed a line to where Apple is now.
Simply put, if you want to buy software for a device and you can only ever buy third party software from the device's vendor, there's a huge problem.
Apple has been doing that shit since the 80s. From keyboards, to USB cables, all the way up to their AppStore. They even tried to make stores with a glass window wall an APPLE copyright thing.
- - - Updated - - -
Yeah, I always forget that most people dont have the tech skills required to even get started on something like that.
Consider if you want to buy a game on the PSP Go. Perhaps you go to the PS store. Perhaps you don't buy a game at all. Choices !
Apple didn't invent restricted eco systems, they've been around for a while. Even with physical products, via exclusivity deals. It will be interesting to see what happens, but I'm a bit dubious about the merits.
2014 Gamergate: "If you want games without hyper sexualized female characters and representation, then learn to code!"
2023: "What's with all these massively successful games with ugly (realistic) women? How could this have happened?!"