"The App Store provides a safe, secure and trusted storefront for customers to find apps from across the globe that enrich and ease their lives". "Apple has put itself in the distribution chain, and it makes us deal with Apple in a way no one else does". This is due to the 30 per cent commission that Apple keeps on each purchase made through its store, making some vendors redirect users to the browser to complete purchases. Instead, Apple is set to appear before the U.S. Supreme Court over antitrust allegations stemming from its popular App Store. Judges could force it to change its pricing structure and Apple may face hundreds of millions in penalties to refund some of the commission it has taken in the past four years. The lofty 30 percent sales fee is being challenged by developers.
But the company says the popularity of software for iPhones and its App Store shouldn't obscure that consumers buys apps from developers, not Apple.
If the justices permit the suit to go forward, a decision against Apple would nearly certainly be a blow to its business.
Apple has always allowed you to install apps exclusively from its App Store.
However last year the San Francisco 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals last year revived the lawsuit, deciding that Apple was a distributor that sold iPhone apps directly to consumers.
Justice Stephen Breyer, who taught antitrust law, said it was a simple and long-standing principle that those with a complaint sued the monopoly. I pay Apple directly with credit card information that I've supplied to Apple.
Chief Justice John Roberts was alone among the nine justices who seemed prepared to agree with Apple.
However, a few of the justices expressed some skepticism with Apple's arguments. "From my perspective, I've just engaged in a one-step transaction with Apple", Kagan said.
"Apple's revolutionary App Store unleashed a wave of innovation in software development, providing consumers with unrivaled choice and access to services that previously did not exist", said a spokesperson in an emailed statement.
Apple told the court in an appeal that the outcome of this lawsuit could affect e-commerce venues such as Google Shopping, Amazon and Facebook's marketplace.
Apple is supported by Apple fanboy President Donald (Prince of Orange) Trump's administration.
"I really wonder whether, in light of what has happened since then, the court's evaluation stands up", Alito said.
The claims against Apple date to 2011 when several iPhone buyers including lead plaintiff Robert Pepper of Chicago filed a class action lawsuit against Apple in federal court in Oakland, California. Fellow conservative appointee Neil Gorsuch also looked to be inclined to side against Apple, suggesting the case Cupertino cited in its claim, Illinois Brick v Illinois, should not be applied in this case.