On Nov 30, 12:56 pm, Kevin Wright <[email protected]> wrote: > Quite... The app store has a monopoly over distribution of software to iOS > devices. I have no idea what definition of "monopoly" is required for > anti-trust though.
That's been the game console model since the very beginning, and I don't think Nintendo, Sego or Sony were ever successfully sued as "single source of distribution on their platform". Quite the opposite - they typically won lawsuits against companies selling adapters / devices to load [ pirated | "backed-up"] games on their platforms. And they even managed to make it an illegal business to import (cheaper) US games in Europe. There are other cases too - cable TV boxes, Amazon Kindle hardware etc. > Interestingly, the current DMCA exemptions do suggest that this sort of > walled garden lock-in is recognised as a problem. So I'm sure that some > suitable definition of monopoly could be found if the US government felt a > need to slap Apple on the wrist. Interestingly, Apple promotes web apps as a way of circumventing their own app store (just look at was just added in iOS 4.2: http://insideria.com/2010/11/apples-ios-42-delivers-some-we.html). This is different from Microsoft, who put IE development on hold once Netscape was beaten, presumably to protect their Windows monopoly. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
