I am not a lawyer, but to me this seems like they were the market leader in smartphones at the time and using that monopoly to monopolize another market.
Re:Dear DoJ: You Need To Sue Apple Again
by rbarooah on Wednesday April 11, 2012 @04:45PM
(#3829553)
Being the market leader doesn't give you a monopoly in any market, and certainly not in a young and growing one.
Considering that Steve Jobs wanted to "destroy" Android, they were at least headed in that direction, and at the time, they had the majority of the smartphone market, i.e. phones where you could actually buy an ebook.
Re:Dear DoJ: You Need To Sue Apple Again
by rbarooah on Wednesday April 11, 2012 @06:16PM
(#3829926)
These things are irrelevant to the definition of a monopoly.
And the definition of a monopoly is irrelevant to the DoJ case being discussed. So it appears everyone is even.
(edit: crap, just realized I'd been tricked into responding to rbarooah again. Apologies all.)
Re:Dear DoJ: You Need To Sue Apple Again
by rbarooah on Wednesday April 11, 2012 @07:18PM
(#3830130)
When was the last time you saw anyone on HN directly insult someone else here in such a mean and insidious way?
You wrote that edit just to try to hurt and undermine me.
I think this is the first time I've seen anything like it here, and it has a really unpleasant schoolyard bully vibe to it.
iPads are not sold on contract. iPhones come with a contract, but the contract doesn't force you to keep using the device - just the wireless service.
You can sell the phone and buy a different one to use with the same contract if you don't like it.