There is an argument to be made that, since Apple is fairly restrictive of what software can be made for their platforms, Apple has a monopoly on... software for Apple devices? App stores for Apple devices?
In that case, Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony have “monopolies” on their platforms?
That's... not an argument I've heard before, but I suppose it does follow. At that point the issue becomes the question of whether anyone feels it's worth the effort of pursuing the issue in court. If Spotify wins this one, they might! I do know that back in the 80s, Activision was making Atari 2600 games without any sort of license, and Atari lost its suit attempting to prevent that -- Activision was the first third-party game developer. Not sure whether the change since then (all console games being licensed) is legal or just practical.
Sure they have monopolies on their platforms, but the key point is how they act within their monopolies
The argument is that what Apple's doing inside there 'monopoly' is egregious enough to run afoul of these laws. Whether creating a music app on their system that is by default at a 30% revenue advantage compared to their competitors runs afoul of these laws is the question.
Monopolies by themselves aren't necessarily a problem it's when they leverage their monopoly position that there are issues.
Sure they have monopolies on their platforms, but the key point is how they act within their monopolies
Everything that people complain about with Apple us even worse with the consoles.
1. People complain about having to buy a Mac and pay $99 a year to develop for iOS. You can’t even develop on a PlayStation without signing an NDA and I couldn’t find anywhere reputable that knew the price.
2. The console makers also get a cut of every game sold on their platform - either physical or digital.
3. The platform owners - especially Nintendo - are much stricter about what they will allow on their platforms.
4. It’s much harder to “sideload” console games.
5. All of the console makers have first party games where they don’t have to pay a fee to themselves.
Whether creating a music app on their system that is by default at a 30% revenue advantage compared to their competitors runs afoul of these laws is the question.
Spotify hasn’t allowed in app subscriptions for years so they don’t pay a fee.
But on the other hand, I can “sideload” my own music and integrate it with my Apple Music library without paying Apple anything. Can I do that with Spotify? It seems like Spotify has more of a walled garden than Apple...
In that case, Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony have “monopolies” on their platforms?