United States v. Apple INC Court Filing, retrieved on March 21, 2024 is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This part is 16 of 25. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here D. Relevant Markets 164. All smartphones compete against each other in a broad relevant market. But industry participants, including Apple, assess competition among smartphones in narrower markets that are best understood as submarkets of the larger all-smartphone market. Because Apple chooses not to compete to sell new smartphones in the entry-level tier, the most relevant market to assess its conduct is a narrower submarket that excludes this tier. Regardless of how the market is drawn, however, Apple’s conduct is unlawful. iv. Performance smartphones are a relevant product market 165. Performance smartphones are a narrower relevant product market within the broader smartphone market. This narrower market includes those smartphones that compete with most iPhones and excludes the lowest-end smartphones, which industry participants sometimes refer to as “entry-level” smartphones. 166. Industry participants recognize performance smartphones as distinct and frequently group smartphones into tiers that include entry-level smartphones and higher tiers such as “premium” or “flagship.” 167. Apple has also long recognized a distinction between these higher-end smartphones and lower-end, entry-level smartphones. Apple’s own documents indicate it does not view entry-level smartphones as competing with the iPhone and other performance smartphones. 168. Performance smartphones have distinct characteristics and uses as compared to other smartphones. For example, entry-level smartphones are generally made with lower-quality materials and are less durable (e.g., plastic instead of metal and glass). They have lower-performance components such as slower processors and lower-capacity storage, which prevent users from running more intensive applications or storing large volumes of pictures and data on the device. Entry-level smartphones often lack features such as an NFC antenna that allows consumers to use their phone to make payments or access passes for public transit. 169. Consumers typically purchase performance smartphones under different terms than entry-level smartphones. Consumers generally use entry-level smartphones along with prepaid service plans. By contrast, consumers usually purchase performance smartphones for use with post-paid service plans that include promotional discounts to consumers who purchase performance smartphones. 170. Because of these differences, among others, between entry-level smartphones and performance smartphones, entry-level smartphones are not reasonable substitutes for performance smartphones. 171. Moreover, competition from non-performance smartphones is not sufficient today to prevent Apple from exercising monopoly power in the performance smartphone market. v. Smartphones are a broader relevant product market 172. Smartphones are a relevant product market. Smartphones are distinct from phones that offer less capable hardware and software options than smartphones. These other phones, sometimes called “feature phones,” may offer basic web browsing in addition to calling and messaging options, but do not offer the breadth of access to the internet or third-party apps as smartphones. Similarly, these phones often have lower-quality hardware, such as poorer displays, less capable cameras, and rely on physical keyboards instead of smartphone touch screens. Thus, these phones are not reasonable substitutes for smartphones. 173. Smartphones are also distinct from other portable devices, such as tablets, smartwatches, and laptop computers. These devices lack the combination of function, size, and portability that consumers rely on in a smartphone, even if they offer some similar capabilities. Thus, none of these other products are reasonable substitutes for smartphones. 174. Apple, other participants in the market, and the public recognize that smartphones are distinct from feature phones and other portable devices. 175. Competition from feature phones, or other alternatives, is not sufficient to prevent Apple from exercising monopoly power in the smartphone market. vi. The United States is a relevant geographic market for performance smartphones and smartphones 176. The United States is a relevant geographic market for the sale of performance smartphones and smartphones. Users in the United States demand services offered by U.S. retailers when they purchase a smartphone. For example, consumers who purchase a smartphone from their mobile carrier can get assistance with activating their new device, setting it up, and transferring important content like apps, messages, photos, and video to their new smartphone. A smartphone purchased abroad for use in the United States might be incompatible with the consumer’s domestic carrier, may not have the necessary radio technology to take advantage of the carrier’s highest speed connections, the carrier might not be able to offer support during setup or subsequently, or the phone’s warranty may be invalid. 177. Consumers must also purchase smartphones through a U.S. retailer if they want to take advantage of valuable promotions offered by their mobile carrier. These same promotions and free financing are unavailable to U.S. consumers who purchase their phones in other countries. 178. Finally, potential new smartphone entrants to the U.S. market must also comply with telecommunications regulations and satisfy other legal requirements. No extensive regulatory framework governs how Apple operates its platform with respect to developers, but there are a number of regulatory requirements that must be met in order to enter the smartphone market. For example, some smartphone makers are effectively barred from offering their smartphones to U.S. consumers. 179. Consumers in the United States could not avoid or defeat an increase in the price of performance smartphones or smartphones by purchasing and importing smartphones from abroad. This allows Apple to set prices for the same smartphone in the United States separately from those in other countries. For example, Apple lowered the price of the iPhone 11 in China relative to the United States because Apple faced greater competition in China. This additional competition arises in part because a popular super app put competitive pressure on Apple and made it easier for users to switch from an iPhone to a rival smartphone. As a result, Apple is unable to command the same prices for the iPhone in China than they do in the United States due to less competition. Continue Reading . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case retrieved on March 21, 2024, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. justice.gov

How Apple Secured Monopoly Power in Smartphone Markets

Apple's Role in Promoting Competition Through Middleware

Too Long; Didn't Read

Make resilience your competitive advantage

Defining Relevant Markets in the Smartphone Industry

About Author

Comments

TOPICS

THIS ARTICLE WAS FEATURED IN

Related Stories

Untitled Story

20% of All General Searches in the U.S. Go Through the Default on User-Downloaded Version of Chrome

USA v. Apple: Full Antitrust Lawsuit

Why the DOJ is Going After Apple

The DOJ Sues Apple for Orchestrating a Monopoly in the Smartphone Market

A Deep Dive into Apple's Dominance in the Smartphone Market

20% of All General Searches in the U.S. Go Through the Default on User-Downloaded Version of Chrome

USA v. Apple: Full Antitrust Lawsuit

Why the DOJ is Going After Apple

The DOJ Sues Apple for Orchestrating a Monopoly in the Smartphone Market

A Deep Dive into Apple's Dominance in the Smartphone Market

Light-Mode

Classic

Newspaper

Dark-Mode

Neon Noir

Minty

HN StartUps