The United States Department of Justice along with 15 states filed an antitrust lawsuit against Apple on Thursday (Mar 21) over monopolizing the smartphone market.
Earlier, the competitors of the iPhone maker were sued by regulators, which include Alphabet’s Google, Meta Platforms and Amazon.com across the administrations of both former President Donald Trump and President Joe Biden.
“Consumers should not have to pay higher prices because companies violate the antitrust laws,” Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a statement. “If left unchallenged, Apple will only continue to strengthen its smartphone monopoly.”
The Justice Department stated that Apple in terms of earnings outperforms its rival companies by charging up to $1,599 for an iPhone.
The officials additionally stated that Apple levies hidden fees on various business partners, including software developers, credit card firms, and also its competitors like Google, which eventually raises consumer costs and boosts Apple’s profits.
Apple denies allegations
Apple rebuffed the allegations stating that the lawsuit threatened the core principles that set apart the products manufactured by the company in the industry.
“This lawsuit threatens who we are and the principles that set Apple products apart in fiercely competitive markets. If successful, it would hinder our ability to create the kind of technology people expect from Apple — where hardware, software, and services intersect,” the iPhone maker said in a statement.
The 88-page lawsuit, filed in U.S. federal court in Newark, New Jersey, said it was focused on “freeing smartphone markets from Apple’s anticompetitive and exclusionary conduct and restoring competition to lower smartphone prices for consumers, reducing fees for developers, and preserving innovation for the future.”
The Justice Department along with the District of Columbia filed the lawsuit seeking changes at Apple.
An official said “The remedy has to be tailored to the harm that we are required to prove at trial” and suggested that break-up or reduction of the size of Apple was one of the possibilities as it was noted that “structural relief is also a form of equitable relief.”
(With inputs from agencies)
