💎 Fed’s first rate cut since 2020 set to trigger market. Find undervalued gems with Fair ValueSee Undervalued Stocks

U.S. top court mulls Apple's App Store commissions in antitrust case

Published 06/18/2018, 11:48 AM
© Reuters. FILE PHOTO: A woman looks at the screen of her mobile phone in front of an Apple logo outside its store in Shanghai
AAPL
-

By Andrew Chung

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday agreed to take up Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL) Inc's bid to escape a lawsuit accusing it of breaking federal antitrust laws by monopolizing the market for iPhone software applications and causing consumers to pay more than they should.

The justices said they would hear Apple's appeal of a lower court's ruling that revived the proposed class-action lawsuit by iPhone buyers over commissions that the Cupertino, California-based technology company receives through its App Store.

The case could expand the threat of antitrust damages against companies in the rapidly growing field of electronic commerce, which generates hundreds of billions of dollars annually in U.S. retail sales.

President Donald Trump's administration backed Apple and urged the justices to take the case.

Businesses that potentially could be threatened by such consumer litigation are electronic marketplaces like the App Store, ticket site StubHub, Amazon's Marketplace and eBay where individual sellers set prices.

The antitrust claims against Apple date back to a 2011 lawsuit by several iPhone buyers in California federal court, including lead plaintiff Robert Pepper of Chicago, according to court papers. The plaintiffs said Apple has monopolized the sale of apps like messaging programs and games, leading to inflated prices compared to if apps were available from other sources.

Though developers set the prices of their apps, Apple collects the payments from iPhone users, charging developers a 30 percent commission on each purchase. Developers earned more than $20 billion in 2016, according to Apple.

The company sought to have the antitrust claims dismissed, saying the plaintiffs did not have the needed legal standing to bring the lawsuit.

The case hinges on a 1977 U.S. Supreme Court decision that limited damages for anti-competitive conduct to those directly overcharged rather than indirect victims who paid an overcharge passed on by others.

A federal judge in Oakland, California threw out the suit, saying the consumers were not direct purchasers because the higher fees they paid were passed on to them by the developers.

But the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in 2017 revived the litigation, saying Apple was a distributor that sold iPhone apps directly to consumers and must face the antitrust claims.

E-commerce reached $452 billion in U.S. retail sales in 2017, according to U.S. government estimates.

© Reuters. FILE PHOTO: A woman looks at the screen of her mobile phone in front of an Apple logo outside its store in Shanghai

Latest comments

Risk Disclosure: Trading in financial instruments and/or cryptocurrencies involves high risks including the risk of losing some, or all, of your investment amount, and may not be suitable for all investors. Prices of cryptocurrencies are extremely volatile and may be affected by external factors such as financial, regulatory or political events. Trading on margin increases the financial risks.
Before deciding to trade in financial instrument or cryptocurrencies you should be fully informed of the risks and costs associated with trading the financial markets, carefully consider your investment objectives, level of experience, and risk appetite, and seek professional advice where needed.
Fusion Media would like to remind you that the data contained in this website is not necessarily real-time nor accurate. The data and prices on the website are not necessarily provided by any market or exchange, but may be provided by market makers, and so prices may not be accurate and may differ from the actual price at any given market, meaning prices are indicative and not appropriate for trading purposes. Fusion Media and any provider of the data contained in this website will not accept liability for any loss or damage as a result of your trading, or your reliance on the information contained within this website.
It is prohibited to use, store, reproduce, display, modify, transmit or distribute the data contained in this website without the explicit prior written permission of Fusion Media and/or the data provider. All intellectual property rights are reserved by the providers and/or the exchange providing the data contained in this website.
Fusion Media may be compensated by the advertisers that appear on the website, based on your interaction with the advertisements or advertisers.
© 2007-2024 - Fusion Media Limited. All Rights Reserved.