• alessandroOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    In this case, Google did look more shady than Apple because there were reports of Google pushing developer to not publish on other Android’s store (which is an illegal anti-competive practice Google operate on some of its platform like Youtube etc.). Apple didn’t need to employ such practices because alternative stores on iOS are nearly impossible.

    • Ganbat@lemmyonline.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      So Google gets hit for trying to establish a monopoly but Apple gets a pass for having one already established?

      Some judges need to be removed.

      • alessandroOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Judges apply law written by your lawmaker. They are not some sort of kings, you know.

        Don’t get me wrong, Apple surely is a shit company like many others, but barking at the wrong tree… just help them.

        • Ganbat@lemmyonline.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Uh… What? No. One judge said moving towards this type of control is monopolistic, while another said that already having that control isn’t. They’re applying the same laws, but applied them completely differently. That’s on the judge. And most anti-trust laws are federal, so they would be applying the same laws