Apple - US antitrust lawsuit: Regulators accused iPhone-maker of monopolizing smartphone markets, "unlawful exclusionary behaviour"
After antitrust lawsuits against Alphabet's, Google, Meta Platforms and Amazon.com, US lawmakers have accused Apple of monopolizing smartphone markets.
ADVERTISEMENT
The U.S. Department of Justice and 15 states sued Apple as the US government cracks down on Big Tech, alleging the iPhone maker monopolized the smartphone market and used practices to crush rivals, drive up prices and make it difficult for users to switch.
After antitrust lawsuits against Alphabet's, Google, Meta Platforms and Amazon.com, US lawmakers have accused Apple of monopolizing smartphone markets. These have happened across the administrations of both former President Donald Trump and President Joe Biden.
"Consumers should not have to pay higher prices because companies violate the antitrust laws," Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a statement. "If left unchallenged, Apple will only continue to strengthen its smartphone monopoly."
At a press conference, Garland noted that Apple’s net income — which was $97bn in 2023 — “exceeds the GDP of more than 100 countries”, in large part due to the success of its iPhone, which he said has a more than 65 per cent share of the US smartphone market, FT reported.
Over the years “Apple has maintained monopoly power in the smartphone market” not simply by “competition on the merits” but through an intentional strategy to exclude competitors, he said.
Garland stated that “Apple has maintained its power not because of its superiority but because of its unlawful exclusionary behaviour."
Apple responded, calling the lawsuit “wrong on the facts and the law”.
FT carried Apple's statement that said, "This lawsuit threatens who we are and the principles that set Apple products apart in fiercely competitive markets,” it said. “If successful, it would hinder our ability to create the kind of technology people expect from Apple — where hardware, software and services intersect. It would also set a dangerous precedent, empowering government to take a heavy hand in designing people’s technology.”
