Not when theres only 2 choices, and effectively only 1 choice depending on your work. The rights of wider market and it's consumers involved are higher. This is precedent that's been set time and again in every other consumer facing industry and it applies just as well here.
Yes, even when there are only 2 choices. No customer has any right, legal or otherwise, for iPhone-the-universal-and-open-computing-device. Not only that, most customers are customers because it's a walled garden. What are you going to say to a company after it loses customers and revenue and its expenses rise because you took away what made it unique? "Sorry, that's how the system works?", I guess?
Yep, that's how the system works. I have no qualms with forcing the richest company in the world to play fair. You may be under the idea that computers are optional - they're not. Almost everyone has a mobile device, even homeless. They're required to participate in government and business. It's how we rent apartments, pay bills and operate in society. The market has become a public problem by apples hand. Markets no longer belong to their creators when they of their own choices create matters of significant public issue. Apple is not special.
We have plenty of precedent from microsoft being forced to allow software before. Apple and friends have lobbied (bribed) heavily for antitrust and antimonopoly to no longer have teeth. If it were 30 years ago apple would have been put through the meat grinder.
If we need the legal right then we'll legislate it.
Yes, almost everyone has a computing device - and in these cases you listed it's never ever a iPhone. Even if it was, the fact that there is an open alternative is enough to let Apple be alone in making their luxury appliance.
