“Google has taken great pains to appear more open than Apple, licensing the Android operating system to third parties like Samsung and allowing users to install apps via other methods than the Play store. Apple does neither. When it comes to exclusivity, Apple has become synonymous with “walled garden” in the public imagination. So why did a jury find that Google held a monopoly but Apple didn’t?”

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    70
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    They didn’t.

    They determined that Google colluded with others to protect their monopoly and keep competitors out.

    Monopolies by themselves aren’t illegal.

    • @Serinus
      link
      English
      3911 months ago

      “The big difference between Apple and Google is Apple didn’t write anything down,” Sweeney said

      • @5200
        link
        English
        8
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        deleted by creator

        • @Serinus
          link
          English
          511 months ago

          Yes, but when a court order to retain documents comes down, the legal department of those companies knows how to do so.

          • @5200
            link
            English
            1
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            deleted by creator

            • @Serinus
              link
              English
              211 months ago

              Yes, this situation just doesn’t fit that bill. They kept the purge in place after the court order, otherwise they’d be fine.

              • @5200
                link
                English
                4
                edit-2
                11 months ago

                deleted by creator

    • billwashere
      link
      English
      511 months ago

      So basically Google treated certain folks differently than others and Apple said “Fuck off” to everyone? Is that the gist?

      • @ohlaph
        link
        English
        311 months ago

        Basically.