{"id":49335,"date":"2025-09-23T15:57:58","date_gmt":"2025-09-23T19:57:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mjtsai.com\/blog\/?p=49335"},"modified":"2025-09-23T15:57:58","modified_gmt":"2025-09-23T19:57:58","slug":"australian-court-finds-ios-app-store-monopoly","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mjtsai.com\/blog\/2025\/09\/23\/australian-court-finds-ios-app-store-monopoly\/","title":{"rendered":"Australian Court Finds iOS App Store Monopoly"},"content":{"rendered":"

Juli Clover<\/a>:<\/p>\n

Back in August, Australia’s federal court ruled that the Apple App Store had violated competition laws by prohibiting sideloading and alternative payment methods.<\/p>

At the time, the court had not shared a written judgment, but now the 900-page document has been published and additional information on the court’s decision is available. In a statement to MacRumors<\/em>, Apple said that it does not agree with the court’s decision and will continue to argue its position in court.<\/p>

[…]<\/p>

The court adopted a narrow definition of the markets in play, viewing iOS as its own ecosystem and concluding that Apple has a monopoly over iOS app distribution and in-app payment processing.<\/p>

[…]<\/p>

The Australian court used Europe’s Digital Markets Act as evidence that alternative app distribution is possible, but Apple says that the viewpoint ignores the risks associated with skirting the App Store’s security and privacy protections.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n

Ben Lovejoy<\/a>:<\/p>\n

Regulators tend to take the view that the relevant market is “iOS apps,” and here Apple has a 100% monopoly on their sale and distribution. Edge cases aside, there is no way for a developer to bring an iOS app to market without selling it through the App Store.<\/p>

[…]<\/p>

The court did agree that Apple has a right to charge for its intellectual property, and that the company’s prohibition of third-party app stores is justified.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n

Previously:<\/p>\n