Apple Files Motion to Dismiss DOJ Antitrust Lawsuit

Apple has filed a motion to dismiss the Department of Justice antitrust lawsuit brought against the company in March.

In the lawsuit, the DOJ alleges that Apple exercises its monopoly power to extract more money from consumers, developers, content creators, artists, publishers, small businesses, and merchants. It also claims the company selectively imposes contractual restrictions on developers and withholds critical ways of accessing iPhone.

You can learn more about the lawsuit here:
● U.S. Sues Apple Alleging Antitrust Violations


Today, Apple filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit in the United States District Court of New Jersey.

--
"The Government asks this Court to endorse a theory of antitrust liability that no court has ever recognized and to sanction a judicial redesign of one of the most innovative and consumer-friendly products ever made: iPhone. Apple has invested billions of dollars to create a revolutionary, cutting-edge product and to distinguish iPhone in a fiercely competitive smartphone market through consumer-oriented features. This lawsuit is based on the false premise that iPhone's success has come not through building a superior product that consumers trust and love, but through Apple's intentional degradation of iPhone to block purported competitive threats. That outlandish claim bears no relation to reality. And the Government's theory that Apple has somehow violated the antitrust laws by not giving third parties broader access to iPhone runs headlong into blackletter antitrust law protecting a firm's right to design and control its own product."

"The truth, of course, is that Apple has granted third parties exceptionally broad access to iPhone, its features, and the App Store, while also enforcing reasonable limitations to protect consumers and ensure the safe, secure, and seamless iPhone experience for which Apple is justifiably known. But even setting that aside, it is simply not a viable theory of antitrust law for the Government to contend that Apple must open its own platform and its own technologies to third parties on the terms and conditions that those parties prefer. The third parties at issue here are well-capitalized social media companies, big banks, and global gaming developers, all of whom are formidable competitors in their own right and none of whom have the same incentives to protect the integrity or security of iPhone as Apple has."
--

Apple provides five reasons why the Government's "ill-conceived" complaint should be dismissed...


1. No Exclusionary Conduct: Apple argues that it has not engaged in exclusionary conduct, which is a necessary element of a Section 2 claim under the Sherman Act. The company asserts that its decisions about the terms and conditions for dealing with third parties are lawful and protected under antitrust law.
2. No Substantial Anticompetitive Effects: The complaint does not plausibly allege that Apple's actions have caused substantial anticompetitive effects in the relevant smartphone market. Apple contends that its policies do not deter customers from switching to competitors like Google or Samsung.
3. No Monopoly Power: Apple claims it does not have monopoly power in any relevant market. The company highlights that it faces significant competition from other major players in the global market, such as Google and Samsung.
4. Lack of Specific Intent: The complaint fails to provide sufficient allegations of specific intent to monopolize, which is required for an attempted monopolization claim.
5. Unlawful "Course of Conduct" Allegation: Apple argues that the DOJ's attempt to characterize its actions as an unlawful "course of conduct" fails because all of the company's challenged conduct is lawful under established refusal-to-deal precedent.

More details in the full motion linked below...

Read More