Re:Apple Music on Android requires its own payment details t...
by dwaite on Friday June 19, 2020 @04:26AM
(#23572332)
> That's not exactly the same scenario. If Ford allowed installing radios only via Ford and allowed other companies to sell radios via Ford, but then artificially restricted said radios so that its radios would have an advantage then it would apply, and I suspect that people would be upset.
This happens all the time. Integration of the radio and climate control system/navigation system. Custom wiring for the speaker system and accessory systems. Dashboard cavities which are a non-standard size.
Re:Apple Music on Android requires its own payment details t...
by yyyk on Sunday June 21, 2020 @06:52AM
(#23591283)
Not remotely comparable. Ford may not facilitate creating such a radio, but prevent it either. A company could figure out everything and sell a radio to a client without paying Ford or being sold to the customer by Ford or going via Ford at all or even losing warranty.
Ultimately, being a marketmaker comes with responsibilities. If Apple wants to close iPhones and support only Apple software they could do that. But as long as Apple operates an App Store and does not allow other methods of install, this comes with the legal obligation to play fair.
Re:Apple Music on Android requires its own payment details t...
by sudosysgen on Friday June 19, 2020 @03:44PM
(#23578188)
Sure, and if someone makes a radio that fulfills all of these functions, then they can sell it.
Here's IMHO a better analogy: Apple is running a mall, while also operating a chain store operating in said mall. Apple Mall allows competitors to Apple Chain Store to rent stores in the mall.
However, it turns out that for some reason, there are "Beware of Leopard" signs near the competitor stores. Also, the public area near them is never cleaned or maintained, except for signs promising cheaper products at the Apple Chain Store (and the leopard signs of course).
Would that be legal? Apple Mall is hardly a monopoly. Despite losing the location, the other stores could move. None of the agreements specifically bans this.
For some reason though, I don't think that would fly - the other stores have a reasonable expectation that after paying rent Apple won't sabotage them. Just like companies paying for the Developer License and Apple Store tax have a reasonable expectation Apple won't unduly hinder them for its own products.