去翻了一下原文新闻
Apple must open up App Store payments, court decrees
https://www.applemust.com/apple-must-open-up-its-payments-system/
In the 185-page ruling (available here) the judge wrote:
“ Ultimately, after evaluating the trial evidence, the Court finds that the
relevant market here is digital mobile gaming transactions, not gaming
generally and not Apple’s own internal operating systems related to the App
Store. The mobile gaming market itself is a $100 billion industry. The size
of this market explains Epic Games’ motive in bringing this action. Having
penetrated all other video game markets, the mobile gaming market was Epic
Games’ next target and it views Apple as an impediment.
“Further, the evidence demonstrates that most App Store revenue is generated
by mobile gaming apps, not all apps. Thus, defining the market to focus on
gaming apps is appropriate. Generally speaking, on a revenue basis, gaming
apps account for approximately 70% of all App Store revenues. This 70% of
revenue is generated by less than 10% of all App Store consumers. These
gaming-app consumers are primarily making in-app purchases which is the focus
of Epic Games’ claims. By contrast, over 80% of all consumer accounts
generate virtually no revenue, as 80% of all apps on the App Store are free.
The judgement also says
“Having defined the relevant market as digital mobile gaming transactions,
the Court next evaluated Apple’s conduct in that market. Given the trial
record, the Court cannot ultimately conclude that Apple is a monopolist under
either federal or state antitrust laws. While the Court finds that Apple
enjoys considerable market share of over 55% and extraordinarily high profit
margins, these factors alone do not show antitrust conduct. Success is not
illegal. The final trial record did not include evidence of other critical
factors, such as barriers to entry and conduct decreasing output or
decreasing innovation in the relevant market. The Court does not find that it
is impossible; only that Epic Games failed in its burden to demonstrate Apple
is an illegal monopolist.”
====
法律的东西真的难懂...
我大概看了一下,勉强能理解的是...
重点放在“巿场”的定义。
Epic把重点放在移动游戏巿场,而不是整个苹果的App巿场。虽然移动游戏巿场占了苹果
收入的70%,但移动游戏市场只占了用户数量的10%而已。
只看这10%内苹果的行为,你无法证明苹果有垄断行为。苹果的确赚很多,但赚很多不犯
法。
应该是这样吧!看有没有懂Antitrust的来说明。
用app数量看怪怪的吧平均一颗睾丸的概念比如一个雨林国家只有10%人从事林木业 再考虑动手放火的可能连1%都不到 全球气候变迁就不干这国家的事了?
不是..你要说人家垄断市场 那你得先定义“市场”呀而本案中的市场是移动游戏市场 不是App市场
作者:
tindy (tindy)
2021-09-12 10:34:00新闻本身的问题吧 你要专注在游戏市场
作者:
tindy (tindy)
2021-09-12 10:35:00那关注点应该是,是不是所有游戏都只能经由苹果商店
作者:
scotttomlee (ã»ã—ã®ã‚†ã‚ã¿ã¯ä¿ºã®å«ï¼)
2021-09-12 10:35:00用数量看真的很奇怪 如果是全APP收入的10%还差不多
不过就算是那样还是怪 毕竟这是一场有关利润分配的官司
确实不能说是垄断啊 除非google store被消灭了 不然顶多是寡占市场
作者:
tindy (tindy)
2021-09-12 10:37:00谈游戏市场,结果拿整个非游戏APP来比,很奇怪吧
然后界定市场本来就很难 有免费不含内购的 免费但含内购的 免费但是不内购不能用的 一次付费的 付费也有内购的app
作者:
wanjack (siler145)
2021-09-12 10:38:00总觉得能理解…内购并不是只有游戏app才能做 既然要求是开放其他支付管道,那就把全部app放一起看的意思?
开放支付管道和垄断无关是违反加州的公平竞争法 所以才要求苹果开放
作者:
scotttomlee (ã»ã—ã®ã‚†ã‚ã¿ã¯ä¿ºã®å«ï¼)
2021-09-12 10:39:00用户10%就证明这些用户是课金大户而已跟苹果关系不大
作者:
arrenwu (键盘的战鬼)
2021-09-12 10:41:00其实你们讲的 垄断 会造成的问题就是违反公平竞争法只是要看是什么行为 以及有没有真的违反公平竞争法毕竟 成功不是罪啊!
作者: ttrreeee 2021-09-12 10:42:00
玉米糖浆是不是糖
我记得以前也看过在论反垄断法的学者指出市场定义问题很大...有些东西不是定义个市场就能分清的反正我也不太懂 看有没有高手要说明而且看一下相关新闻 移动游戏市场这个范围好像还是Epic自己提的....
感觉是说因为游戏用户只占了不到10%,而且80%的app是免费的,无法证明消费者权益有受损
作者:
eva00ave (loxer)
2021-09-12 10:45:00平均一颗睾丸就是故意把无关的事物扯在一起滑坡的用法特例从一开始就不会算在平均内
好像就是在吵被垄断的市场到底是什么 双方都给了个定义但最后法院两边都不采用而是自己给了个定义
作者:
atst2 (atst2)
2021-09-12 10:48:00简单讲,游戏市场(100B==Android+iOS+others)Epic指控苹果笼断则是AppStore(iOS游戏+其他应用)
作者:
atst2 (atst2)
2021-09-12 10:49:00但现在市场定义是游戏市场时,看不出Apple有笼断
作者:
lbowlbow (沉睡的小猫)
2021-09-12 10:51:00要算笼断的话应该要看整个app收费市场的apple比例吧
我看的分析是法官认为本案的相关市场不是appstore也不是游戏市场 而是行动游戏的金流服务以这个角度来看apple确实是有反竞争的行为
作者:
atst2 (atst2)
2021-09-12 10:53:00后面收入10%那段,应该是指出AppStore不是游戏专门的Store即便收入大多来自游戏,但不能说他在“游戏市场”上有笼断
apple垄断ios装置的appstore市场没错呀 可能法律没定义像google用自家产品优势打压其他公司就被欧盟罚很重
作者:
poke001 (黑色双鱼)
2021-09-12 12:29:00如果只定义游戏市场 那是不是游戏以外的APP就跟以前不能提供其他管道?
作者:
tindy (tindy)
2021-09-12 12:37:00市场是在讲垄断的部分,第三方支付跟垄断无关