
U.S. Justice Dept Considering Apple Probe: Sources - bemmu
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/exclusive-u-justice-dept-considering-174301198.html
======
golem14
I wonder whether the 3 threatened investigations (Google by DoJ, Facebook by
FTC, now Apple bu DoJ) are not so subtle signaling by the current
administration to fall in line (China trade war, working with Pentagon on AI,
etc) "or else".

There's little evidence, but the fact that these 3 major companies are now
moved against in roughly the same timeframe while the administration and DoJ
have already their hands more than full is suggestive ...

~~~
JumpCrisscross
> _subtle signaling by the current administration to fall in line_

Everyone who's been lobbying for one of these investigations has been lobbying
for the other three. A couple key folks at the DoJ started prioritizing tech
antitrust, in part due to some other time-consuming matters having recently
been sunset. (Previously, it was being pursued as a civil matter though the
regulators. Big legal teams have an easier time squashing those compared.)

No need for a political conspiracy. (In any case, these investigations take a
long time to get going. None of these efforts were started in even the last
months.)

~~~
matthewdgreen
Under another administration (either Democratic or Republican) it might be
reasonable to accept this explanation. The problem with this administration is
that "assume this decision is being made by career employees acting with no
political self-interest" has not proven to be a good betting position.

~~~
mwfunk
In fact, Occam’s Razor would suggest that any action taken by this
administration should be assumed to be politically motivated, barring evidence
to the contrary. Especially since the current administration has always been
very vocally hostile to any sort of regulatory or antitrust action.

~~~
cabaalis
I try very hard to give some grace to the "Trump bad in everything" that I
hear so much. However, his moronic tweets aside, I see nothing more than
normal politicking, and right-of-center governance. The biggest flaw I see is
the inability to admit and correct policy problems, which is absolutely not
unique to President Trump.

~~~
Nasrudith
Privatized child cages for the explicit reason of brutalizing those applying
for asylum are normal right of center governance? Calling an investigation
which found numerous cases of foreign involvement a coup?

I think you might be suffering from severe change blindness.

~~~
inflatableDodo
Nonsense, everything is normal. Look;

> _" I believe that if people stoped_[sic] _using or subscribing to @ATT, they
> would be forced to make big changes at @CNN, which is dying in the ratings
> anyway. It is so unfair with such bad, Fake News! Why wouldn’t they act.
> When the World watches @CNN, it gets a false picture of USA. Sad! "_

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 3, 2019

[https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/11354990026261544...](https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1135499002626154496)

~~~
cabaalis
Trump just does it on Twitter.

[https://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/28/obama-
says...](https://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/28/obama-says-fox-
news-promotes-destructive-viewpoint/)

[https://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/12/business/media/12fox.html...](https://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/12/business/media/12fox.html?pagewanted=all)

[https://www.thenation.com/article/bushs-war-
press/](https://www.thenation.com/article/bushs-war-press/)

~~~
inflatableDodo
I know, that is why I said that everything is normal.

I am in complete agreement that all of those examples make Donald Trump appear
quite normal.

This is because Donald Trump is an ordinary president in a very normal way.

------
epistasis
I hope that this is a sign of increased scrutiny overall, that will lead to
the ISP/media conglomerates too. Comcast is extremely exploitive of it's
regulatory capture of my local government and has a far more detrimental
direct effect on my life than Google does, because I am able to block Google
and use alternatives. Though perhaps the investigation around Google is mostly
about their customers and not their users, I.e. ad purchasers.

~~~
notfromhere
What about this administration suggests they're really into antitrust
enforcement on its merits?

Only reason the GOP is interested in regulating tech is because they believe
tech platforms should be forced to carry their political message without
restrictions.

~~~
epistasis
Forgive my naivete, but based on what I've seen elsewhere I think this
administration is so incompetent that they can't get the levers of government
to do much of anything, unless it's unilateral actions like tariffs. So I'm
not sure that much of the choice to pursue this even comes from temporary
political appointees.

Some of the Democratic candidates (e.g. Warren) also support similar measures,
so it's not required that this is purely a political play.

------
tick_tock_tick
Interesting Elizabeth Warren's campaign just bought up some big billboard in
SF stating this as one of her major campaign promises.

~~~
b_tterc_p
Is this a popular sentiment in SF? I haven’t seen any of it in Massachusetts
where she is from but I would think it would be more popular here.

~~~
tick_tock_tick
They are a very visible industry so they get used as scapegoat as the city
fails to provide basic services to its population.

------
b1daly
I don't see how any anti-trust laws based on having monopoly-level market
control could possibly be applied to Apple.

Apple simply does not have a monopoly in any market, from either a narrow "by
the book" perspective or in a broader functional perspective.

Unless the DoJ Apple is unfairly monopolizing the market for Apple's products
and services...

~~~
oceanplexian
Just because someone can go buy an Android doesn't mean it's not a monopoly.
Having only two options for mobile phone operating systems, both with locked-
in, walled gardens that take a cut from developers isn't competition, it's a
rigged system.

~~~
b1daly
Yes it does mean it’s not a monopoly! That’s the literal definition.

You could describe it as a duopoly but I think it’s pretty clear that Apple
and Google are fierce competitors. And Apple has minority market share by far.

Neither company has anywhere near a well protected position in the market. The
mobile computing market has not seen companies establish long running
monopolies.

Two of the top competitors in the sector, BlackBerry and Nokia, are long gone,
shells of their former selves.

The problem you complain about is due to structural elements in the market,
specifically that network effects are inevitable in the market for operating
systems.

The purpose of anti-trust laws is to protect people against predatory markets
practices, not to interfere with market function because it doesn’t support a
product.

FWIW, there are other mobile OS options available. You just don’t want to use
them because they have not reached a market share significant enough to
support the kind of rock app ecosystem we expect.

------
yalogin
I can see Amazon and Google. What is the complaint against Apple and Facebook?

~~~
snazz
The control over what iOS developers can do has been the source of a lot of
contention recently. Facebook is Big Bad as we all know, but I agree that
they’re not as much a monopoly.

~~~
treis
Duopoly isn't much better than a monopoly. Especially when the other half does
basically the same anti-competitive behaviors.

Really, of all of these, Apple is seemingly the most blatant in their anti-
competitive behaviors. Google and Facebook at least offer choice even if that
choice is a somewhat of an illusion. Apple just flat out forbids competing
with it in distributing iOS apps and vigorously guards its cut of subscription
revenue.

------
brenteldorf
So when are the telecoms going to be looked at?

------
outside1234
I think the only surprise here is that Amazon hasn't been named yet, but maybe
they are setting the table here, so that that one doesn't look politically
motivated. :)

------
darkpuma
In the past few days or so there have been articles about potential antitrust
stuff against Apple, Facebook, and Google. What is going on here?

Facebook article, three hours ago:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20084703](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20084703)

Google article, three days ago:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20066288](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20066288)

Don't get me wrong, I'm pretty excited to see these companies get smacked
around because I think all are too powerful, too influential, but with these
three in a row in such quick succession I have to wonder if the motivation is
political.

Edit: Here is a similar article for Amazon (one day ago), that slipped through
the cracks:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20074593](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20074593)

~~~
golem14
I wonder why this is downvoted. The timing is really curious.

~~~
darkpuma
The Amazon/WaPo article notes the timing as well and hints that it might not
be totally partisan.

> _" Antitrust also has become an early flash point among Democrats vying for
> the White House ahead of the 2020 election. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)
> recently threatened major investigations of Amazon, Apple and Facebook. This
> week, she offered early support in response to news that the Justice
> Department could bring such an investigation against Google."_

Maybe this is a case of numerous parties having a diverse set of motivations
that all line up? Democrats who blame these companies for Trump's election
_(makes the least sense in the specific case of Apple or Amazon...)_ , and
Republicans who say these companies are censoring them _(makes the least sense
in the specific case of Apple or Amazon...)_ Maybe these companies are just
running out of friends in Washington.

~~~
zepto
Seems like this takes the wind out of her presidential campaign. So maybe
partisan after all.

~~~
mc32
That would be a calculation if were a front runner but she isn’t (at least not
at the moment).

------
zepto
If the App Store is forced open, say goodbye to privacy and security on iOS.

~~~
anbop
Why? Apple doesn’t vet apps for privacy or security. The API surface is what
affects these.

~~~
shuckles
APIs that depend on policy to prevent abuse will now just not be available at
all.

~~~
anbop
As it should be. Apple doesn’t have the ability to verify what you do with the
data that gets to your app, so they should not pretend to be able to certify
it.

~~~
nemothekid
What? Apple, today, has enforced the ability to ensure that a flashlight app
isn't vacuuming up your location data.

------
bhouston
I expect Amazon to be next.

------
tastygreenapple
I hope so, it's bogus the app store is locked down like it is. I own my
iPhone, I should be able to download a gab app.

------
m0zg
I feel like this is just a gentle reminder to the "masters of the universe"
about who really runs the country. They've been getting into politics a little
too much lately. If nothing else, this should cool down that ambition. I can
only welcome increased scrutiny for trillion-dollar entities that, to a large
extent, control the flow of information like never before.

