Adobe planning to sue Apple?

ITWorld is reporting that Adobe is preparing their legal team for a lawsuit against Apple over the recent SDK agreement debacle.

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols reports: "Usually I write about security here, but Apple's iron-bound determination to keep Adobe Flash out of any iWhatever device is about to blow up in Apple's face. Sources close to Adobe tell me that Adobe will be suing Apple within a few weeks."

With the release of iPhone OS 4 beta, Apple altered section 3.3.1 of the developer agreement, banning the use of intermediate computability layers and alternative languages in the App Store. The new agreement effectively renders the Flash-to-iPhone compiler in CS5 useless, something that Adobe has largely touted before the OS 4 announcement. 

It is not yet clear what grounds Adobe will base their lawsuit on, but if true, Steve Jobs should be getting a little more than frustrated developer emails in his inbox soon enough. 

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Microsoft outsourcing internal IT services to India

Next Story

Microsoft updates DreamSpark with new apps

70 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Adobe should've released a version of flash for the iphone for jailbreakers on a pretext of a "leak" .
That would kill crapple .

Good I hope Adobe win and then rub Steve Jobs face in it. That was a little forward but, I dislike Steve Jobs, he is a tool.

So far one of the issues that has been brought up recently and in the past are that Flash on a Macintosh is a resource hog. Also, Apple (Steve Jobs) has stated that it's a security problem. Has there been any tests on the iOS to see if this holds true with that as well? Are these (especially the resource issue) possible legitimate reasons for not including Flash support?

FWIW, stopping development for the Macintosh platform would hurt both parties, but it wouldn't be beneficial to Adobe in the least. I thnk that it's becoming more clear that Macintosh OS and iOS are two different platforms that serve different purposes, so as long as one Apple product is still able to be developed for by Adobe then both companies will benefit.

Can you proof me with real data that Adobe has wider diffusion among mac platforms?
Beacuse I know that, in fact, it's not that way.
Major earnings come from PCs and you can easily understand why: the pc world is not an advertising jingle and is not a hollywood movie (where everyone -cool or not- use a mac).
Some reality check is needed: the first step is to get away from apple's tunnel in order to get a wider look on reality and not in our (legitimate) passions/beliefs.

splur said,
Antitrust. Antitrust. Antitrust.

TBH. apple have just been asking for a Antitrust investigation, sins the start of the iPhone. and if you hack it to do what you want it to do. they end up making it into a nice looking aluminum brick.

:Z its one thing to void a warranty for jail braking. but making it an expensive paper weight, is just evil. and shows how much they want to control your property.

you never own an apple product. you just have permission to use it.

Adobe's best move here would be to release the Windows versions of their products 6 or so months before their Mac counterparts or rather keep the Mac users one major release behind the Windows users.

That lets Adobe keep their market-share on the Mac while screwing Apple and pushing people towards Windows which further screws Apple. Mac users would still get their software but it'd be just a bit old.

You know what's going to happen? Apple and Adobe are going to reach an undisclosed settlement. Apple will probably end up allowing to Adobe to put Flash on their devices, just to avoid setting any precedents in court.

From AppleInsider:

http://www.appleinsider.com/ar...r_cs4_iphone_app_tools.html

"Instead, Apple has maintained a clear, unchanging position since the iPhone first appeared that Adobe's desktop Flash platform was not suited for use on mobiles, while its Flash Lite platform failed to support the kind of Flash content users would expect of it.

Adobe did not deliver a mobile version of Flash Player until version 10.0 for Android last summer, but that version still didn't play most of the content users would encounter on the web.

Only the latest 10.1 Flash Player, which is still under development, can play most desktop Flash content on mobiles. However, it requires a Cortex A8-class processor, meaning that even if Apple wanted to bundle it, it could only work on the latest iPhone 3GS.

Adobe's mobile Flash Player 10.1 is targeted at Palm's webOS and Google's Android, with a version planned for Microsoft's upcoming Windows Phone 7 and eventually RIM's BlackBerry OS. On any platform, it can only run on the latest phones sold over the past several months.

Apple has been selling the iPhone for three years now, and has never even had the option to bundle a version of Flash until just recently. It would be hard to imagine how Adobe could claim any legal right to demand that Apple support its monopoly position in desktop dynamic web content playback."

People get all excited for something that may never happen. On what grounds is Adobe suing Apple?

Did Apple promise Adobe anything? No.
Did Apple promise Adobe to work together to make Flash for iPhone? No.
Did Apple approuve, endorse, or guarantee that if Adobe mange to skirt any restrictions it will result in commercial success? No.

Apple has always said, maintained, and unchanged its view on Flash. Flash is simply not good enough.

And it's their hardware, their software. They have all the right to decide how, what, how, where you use it. You don't like it, you go elsewhere. People may not like it, but that's how Apple does business. And it sure seems like it's working for them.

I think there are a couple of points to clear up regarding this:

1) Adobe Flash Player has always run poorly on Mac OS X, so naturally Apple wouldn't want it on a mobile device.
2) Flash isn't the only thing that isn't included - Java, Silverlight etc. are also not there, yet we don't see Sun or Microsoft complaining.
3) If Adobe sues Apple for having a monopoly that would be the most hilarious thing since Flash has the monopoly on web video and web advertising.
4) Having a monopoly on a market isn't illegal, it's good business. If you use that monopoly in an anti-competitive way then it becomes illegal.

What specific part of the iPhone do people have a problem with? It's Apple's product and they can control access to it if they want. It's a sensible idea, especially considering the number of security problems Flash has.

If Adobe sues Apple, they need to also sue every other company that doesn't put Flash on their devices.

Regardless, Apple has a lot more money to spend on lawyers than Adobe does and they could tie Adobe up in the courtroom for years if they wanted to. It would be a silly idea to sue them.

Flash is going. Hello HTML5!

I'd personally like to see Steve Job's face when he goes to a website and it tells him he needs Adobe Flash in order to view the page correctly. I wonder if he goes into a raging fit...

This just in........ Steve Jobs threatens billion dollar lawsuits against all websites on the internet that make him install Flash. Details at 11...

stormchaser2010 said,
I'd personally like to see Steve Job's face when he goes to a website and it tells him he needs Adobe Flash in order to view the page correctly. I wonder if he goes into a raging fit...

This just in........ Steve Jobs threatens billion dollar lawsuits against all websites on the internet that make him install Flash. Details at 11...

Reebok lol I just tried going there today on my iPhone. A seach box came up and maybe two links but the rest of the page was white and a message saying I need Flash to view the page and of course gives you the link to go get it.

I just have one small question. If they ban Flash from the iAnything, than why don't they do the same on all their other products? If it's so poor and they think HTML5 will replace Flash, why not have that stance across all platforms?

I'd like to see what Adobe has on them. Can't wait to see the details.

Apple is shooting themselves at the own feet with these bad moves lately. The HTC sue, the anti_Adobe stance, the Apple Store censorship erasing any Google reference, the repetition of old recipes in bigger form factors (iPad), the blatant hypocrisy mocking a taskbar in a phone and then iPhone OS 4 comes with exactly that same taskbar. Apple needs to realize that: 1) Adobe and their graphics apps was what kept Apple products alive for many years, and even when Adobe now runs faster in Windows, and will run faster in 64 bit, designers still ask for Apple computers because they have that loyalty, 2) The image that has been Apple's success is that of a relaxed, creative guy that gives no trouble. Suing respectable companies like HTC, being hypocritical and arrogant goes against this image, and a similar closeness, jealousy and resented attitude was part of the reason why Apple was almost forgotten in the 90s and Jobs was outed. Are they going to mess up again?

Wow, I just keep thinking and thinking how ****ed off must Adobe feel, after they have developed something in vain.

Not only Adobe, but everyone who does a job. This really sucks apple.

Jose_49 said,
Wow, I just keep thinking and thinking how ****ed off must Adobe feel, after they have developed something in vain.

Not only Adobe, but everyone who does a job. This really sucks apple.

And it seems like Adobe found out about it when WE found out about it... For all the press this feature in Flash was getting, I think the least Adobe deserved was a heads up from Apple on this one. It seems like Apple wanted to make them look foolish...

.Neo said,
Doubtful that Adobe will accomplish anything by doing so...

Agreed. This is Adobe being angry, but not because they can't develop software for Mac anymore, which, if you ask me, is what's necessary if they're going to win any lawsuit here. Yes, it's Apple being clever, but it's not written to block any company outright. It'll be painful for Adobe to develop Flash for Mac however.

Of course Apple thought about this scenario carefully before writing that EULA clause.

Edited by Northgrove, Apr 14 2010, 7:42am :

Apple is being 100% anti-competitive with the software they allow on their devices. i think a law suit is completely necessary from Adobe. I personally love the iWhatever devices Apple produces, but they are walking down a dangerous path in their anti-competitive regulation of the App Store.

Apple and Steve Jobs seem to root their decisions in "what's best for their customers." There may be some truth to this...certainly there has been a disregard to any kind of Quality Control on Linux, Windows, and Mac OS X (IMO, in that order). But at the end of the day "consumer choice" should be trumping this. I hope that Adobe prevails.

Shadrack said,
Apple is being 100% anti-competitive with the software they allow on their devices. i think a law suit is completely necessary from Adobe. I personally love the iWhatever devices Apple produces, but they are walking down a dangerous path in their anti-competitive regulation of the App Store.

Apple and Steve Jobs seem to root their decisions in "what's best for their customers." There may be some truth to this...certainly there has been a disregard to any kind of Quality Control on Linux, Windows, and Mac OS X (IMO, in that order). But at the end of the day "consumer choice" should be trumping this. I hope that Adobe prevails.

I'll never understand this thinking.

They aren't the Only Choice.
They aren't a Publicly funded Company.
They aren't producing a dangerous product.

So why does anything other than the Market have a right to tell them to do anything ?
Where does it end ? Force GM to allow people to choose Ford Engines, and Toyota Gas Pedals ? Maybe force other supermarkets to sell eachothers in house products ?

It's THEIR Product. They didn't need to open it up to any Developers if they didn't want too. Yet because they did they now have to give up control ?

Their Hardware.
Their OS.
Their Store.
Their Rules.

If people don't like it they can go elsewhere and Apple will go bankrupt..

Ryoken said,
I'll never understand this thinking.

They aren't the Only Choice.
They aren't a Publicly funded Company.
They aren't producing a dangerous product.

So why does anything other than the Market have a right to tell them to do anything ?
Where does it end ? Force GM to allow people to choose Ford Engines, and Toyota Gas Pedals ? Maybe force other supermarkets to sell eachothers in house products ?

It's THEIR Product. They didn't need to open it up to any Developers if they didn't want too. Yet because they did they now have to give up control ?

Their Hardware.
Their OS.
Their Store.
Their Rules.

If people don't like it they can go elsewhere and Apple will go bankrupt..

Couldn't agree more. If you don't like Apple's products or their stance on certain things then don't give them your money. At the end of the day, it is Apple's ecosystem. They aren't being anti-competitive. RIM has their devices and app store, as does Android, WinMo/WP7, WebOS, Symbiam, etc. Those are all OS's that are competing in the same space. Having a compelling platform isn't anti-competitive. And if it gets to a point where developers don't like Apple's policy, then they can surely stop developing for the platform. But as long as consumers keep choosing the iPhone and spending the kind of money they spend on apps, developers will keep coding. Adobe has no case. Now I just wish they would make a version of Flash that wasn't such a resource hog on the Mac.

Edited by asdavis10, Apr 14 2010, 12:50am :

Shadrack said,
Apple is being 100% anti-competitive with the software they allow on their devices. i think a law suit is completely necessary from Adobe.

I dunno... Apple isn't saying "You can't develop on our device, because XXX", but instead saying "You must use these development tools for our device". That IS designed especially to cause pain for Adobe, but it isn't blocking them. It's just painful and it's not something Adobe likes so they get angry.

But grounds for a successful lawsuit. Doubtful, if you ask me. Adobe can still develop Flash for Mac. Yeah, really. They can in theory.

I doubt anyone won any particular lawsuit when Microsoft dropped Visual Basic 6 support in Visual Studio, and then just offered some half-baked clumsy "upgrade tool" that didn't convert to VB .NET well. I don't think this scenario is much different. No company is blocked, but they must develop in new ways.

Edited by Northgrove, Apr 14 2010, 7:21am :

Ryoken said,
I'll never understand this thinking.

They aren't the Only Choice.
They aren't a Publicly funded Company.
They aren't producing a dangerous product.

So why does anything other than the Market have a right to tell them to do anything ?
Where does it end ? Force GM to allow people to choose Ford Engines, and Toyota Gas Pedals ? Maybe force other supermarkets to sell eachothers in house products ?

It's THEIR Product. They didn't need to open it up to any Developers if they didn't want too. Yet because they did they now have to give up control ?

Their Hardware.
Their OS.
Their Store.
Their Rules.

If people don't like it they can go elsewhere and Apple will go bankrupt..

***MY*** IPHONE
***MY*** MAC

Well if Adobe wanted to test what would happen, they could launch the first salvo by announcing that the new release of CS5 suite for the Mac is suspended until further notice. Then go ahead and make the Windows release on time. Then make the offer to all all Mac OS X users using CS4 with valid licenses a trade over option. They can get the CS4 software for Windows for free using there license or they can pay an upgrade option to move over to CS5 for Windows. Than sit back and watch Apple market share start to burn. Lets face the facts, I use both Mac OS X and Windows 7 and when it comes to Adobe products there is not enough of a difference between the versions on the two OS's to say the Mac is better. The same hardware can be had for the Windows platform and we all know that it can be had for nearly 2/3 the cost of the same Apple hardware. This could be the final tipping of scales to push more Mac users than ever over to the Windows camp. I know there are die hard Mac OS X users out there. But lets face the facts. Apple is trying to manipulate Adobe into taking some form of action. If Adobe does decide to terminate there Apple platform support, I can see Microsoft following right behind with Office. And because Adobe is such a big player how many other companies are going to look at Apple and start to wonder when Apple is going to start to go after them and restrict there possible development on the platform. Apple needs to truly take a step back and consider whats its doing. They could be slitting their own throats over this.

I don't think that Adobe has any leverage against Apple, except legal leverage. Cutting off the Adobe Creative Suite will more than likely hurt the consumers and Adobe more than it will hurt Apple. Let's face it, most Mac users are Apple loyalist and Adobe pulling the plug on CS won't sway them in numbers.

It also opens the door for some other player in the desktop publishing world to swoop in.

Impulseman36 said,
Well if Adobe wanted to test what would happen, they could launch the first salvo by announcing that the new release of CS5 suite for the Mac is suspended until further notice.

Adobe would be better off to make the announcement that CS5 would be the last Suite to be released for the Mac. With Apple so against Adobe right now, they can just say that they are not in a position to invest millions of dollars on a platform that repeatedly attacks them and their products. To produce products for a platform that doesn't want you would be stupid. I would seriously doubt the relationship between the two companies going forward in terms of support from Apple.

Shadrack said,
I don't think that Adobe has any leverage against Apple, except legal leverage. Cutting off the Adobe Creative Suite will more than likely hurt the consumers and Adobe more than it will hurt Apple. Let's face it, most Mac users are Apple loyalist and Adobe pulling the plug on CS won't sway them in numbers.

It also opens the door for some other player in the desktop publishing world to swoop in.

Exactly. The argument for Adobe to drop Mac support doesn't really make sense... And one of the benefits to the Adobe Creative Suite is that it runs similarly on both platforms anyway...

If they would be able to do this in Europe they would most definitely win because of the anti-competitive behavior of Apple while they somewhat dominate the smartphone market.

Ambroos said,
If they would be able to do this in Europe they would most definitely win because of the anti-competitive behavior of Apple while they somewhat dominate the smartphone market.
Apple would just pull out. Then Adobe would still be screwed, and have just really ****ed off a company that has more than enough money to buy them, or crush them, if they put their mind to it.

Ryoken said,
Apple would just pull out. Then Adobe would still be screwed, and have just really ****ed off a company that has more than enough money to buy them, or crush them, if they put their mind to it.

Apples sole success is in North America. I highly doubt their other markets constitute to alot. Knowing their arrogant ways, apple would tell the EU and all other countries to just go Suck it!..

They are not as big as Microsoft to really have issues.

Ambroos said,
If they would be able to do this in Europe they would most definitely win because of the anti-competitive behavior of Apple while they somewhat dominate the smartphone market.

And by somewhat dominate, I mean 'not at all.'

Ambroos said,
If they would be able to do this in Europe they would most definitely win because of the anti-competitive behavior of Apple while they somewhat dominate the smartphone market.

Huh??

http://www.canalys.com/pr/2010/r2010021.html

And those market shares are much better than the European ones alone, as Apple has by far most success in the USA.

Edited by Northgrove, Apr 14 2010, 7:23am :

Ryoken said,
Apple would just pull out.
You really think a clause like that in their App Store is worth Apple pulling all their business lines out of Europe completely?

DaveGreen said,
Adobe should just stop Mac support.
Less expensive and far more effective.

That would be very effective, but it would be unfair on Mac users to be honest.

DaveGreen said,
Adobe should just stop Mac support.
Less expensive and far more effective.

That would be evil as in Apple-evil, and Adobe doesn't want to be evil. Key difference between the companies.

DaveGreen said,
Adobe should just stop Mac support.
Less expensive and far more effective.

People who say this need to look into just how much of Adobe's REAL/PAID support comes from the community of OS:X users. Yes, there are people who use Adobe products in Windows environments but look at the publishing industry and well about any other company that does visual development (rendering, designing, photo/video editing) and you will notice a LOT of Apple products in use and sending their cash to Adobe.

Do you really think a company that is known to make most of their money from one base set of users is going to say "sorry, Apple made us mad so we are going to make you suffer!" I don't think so.

Pauleh said,
That would be very effective, but it would be unfair on Mac users to be honest.
If Adobe is their reason to spend $2000-3000 (professional) on Mac hardware, then Adobe can be their reason to buy $2000-3000 on PC Hardware, and get not consumer support, but commercial support from suppliers. OR, they'll install Windows on it. Apple loses out in OS (still sells regardless), but still gets the hardware sales, which to be honest, is what they really care about. Otherwise Bootcamp wouldn't exist.

DaveGreen said,
Adobe should just stop Mac support.
Less expensive and far more effective.

What a stupid comment. Do you realise how much Adobe products are used on the Mac platform? The publishing industry would be fracked. They would have to replace all the Mac hardware with generic PC hardware. Not to mention the film/tv sector.

kraized said,

What a stupid comment. Do you realise how much Adobe products are used on the Mac platform? The publishing industry would be fracked. They would have to replace all the Mac hardware with generic PC hardware. Not to mention the film/tv sector.

Or they could use boot camp for the existing macs, just a thought. and buy PC instead of mac's when needed

kraized said,

What a stupid comment. Do you realise how much Adobe products are used on the Mac platform? The publishing industry would be fracked. They would have to replace all the Mac hardware with generic PC hardware. Not to mention the film/tv sector.

I think what you mean is they simply wouldn't upgrade to new versions of the CS Suite.. And Adobe would have to just pray that no one else made a serious contender against their products before their next hardware upgrade cycle..

Holoshed said,

People who say this need to look into just how much of Adobe's REAL/PAID support comes from the community of OS:X users. Yes, there are people who use Adobe products in Windows environments but look at the publishing industry and well about any other company that does visual development (rendering, designing, photo/video editing) and you will notice a LOT of Apple products in use and sending their cash to Adobe.

Do you really think a company that is known to make most of their money from one base set of users is going to say "sorry, Apple made us mad so we are going to make you suffer!" I don't think so.


Reality check, mate. Every one of those industries uses Macs BECAUSE of Adobe's fabulous Mac support. If Adobe cuts Mac support, Apple's market share would easily drop by 20%-30% within a few Creative Suite product cycles.

Adobe's products aren't some random utilities you can do without or find replacements for; they are the products that shape the industry and there is no alternative. Even if better products existed, many companies wouldn't switch due to the sheer amount of investment they have in Adobe by now.

Ask half the Linux fans out there why they do not use it full time, and lack of Adobe products will be your answer. Likewise, developers would abandon Apple in droves if Adobe stopped Mac support.

Hot said,
If Adobe cuts Mac support, Apple's market share would easily drop by 20%-30% within a few Creative Suite product cycles.

20-30%? Who would feel that? :lol:

DaveGreen said,
Adobe should just stop Mac support.
Less expensive and far more effective.

That wouldn't make financial sense for Adobe though, as I would imagine they make a sizable profit on software sales for Mac...

Hot said,

Reality check, mate. Every one of those industries uses Macs BECAUSE of Adobe's fabulous Mac support. If Adobe cuts Mac support, Apple's market share would easily drop by 20%-30% within a few Creative Suite product cycles.

Adobe's products aren't some random utilities you can do without or find replacements for; they are the products that shape the industry and there is no alternative. Even if better products existed, many companies wouldn't switch due to the sheer amount of investment they have in Adobe by now.

Ask half the Linux fans out there why they do not use it full time, and lack of Adobe products will be your answer. Likewise, developers would abandon Apple in droves if Adobe stopped Mac support.

I understand your point, I really do. I am a linux/windows/mac guy myself. I am also a consultant who looks at who uses what and I really think that to some degree you may be right on what would happen if Adobe pulled support but do you KNOW the cult mindset "pure mac" users have in general. I am not saying that like I put them down. I love OS:X myself for a lot of reasons.

People who use OS:X and other Apple products for design purposes also have that deep love for the brand. I know that because I have a lot of those people in my family. These people are not just home brew people. They do stuff for major companies like MTV Networks etc. If I told them tomorrow that Adobe was leaving all Apple branded hardware/OSs then I bet they would just dual boot but go right back to OS:X when done. Sort of like how you said other Linux users you knew did.

DaveGreen said,
Adobe should just stop Mac support.
Less expensive and far more effective.

Heh, well, it doesn't seem like Adobe, who have full insight in their Flash code and development unlike us, agree with you. There are probably too great advantages in covering the ~10% more of the market that the Mac users make up.

Edited by Northgrove, Apr 14 2010, 7:37am :

DaveGreen said,
Adobe should just stop Mac support.
Less expensive and far more effective.
I doubt Apple would be hurt that much at all. If anything it adds further reason for companies to move to HTML 5 given they will need to if they want to support the Mac platform because lets be honest, consumers aren't going to stop buying Macs and they still have access to the older flash versions.

Photoshop users ect will probably just hold off upgrading altogether.

DaveGreen said,
Adobe should just stop Mac support.
Less expensive and far more effective.
Because that would be a wise business move, lol. ¬_¬

kraized said,
What a stupid comment.

Way to be a supportive neowinian.

Still, guy has a point. I have a hard time agreeing it will be less expensive. If you cut 60% of your customer base (making an assumption) what does that do to your revenue stream? Would it be cheaper to cut the size of their market, or proceed with a lawsuit.

Either way, I'm glad this is finally coming to a head.

Well I was looking forward to tinker with some iPhone dev using CS5, but I'm not going to go and learn whatever language I need to learn now.

I would hope that Apple's legal team was briefed before putting sweeping changes like that into the dev agreement. That said, Adobe probably doesn't have idiot lawyers, either. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.

boogerjones said,
I would hope that Apple's legal team was briefed before putting sweeping changes like that into the dev agreement. That said, Adobe probably doesn't have idiot lawyers, either. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.

Yeah, at this point I don't see how Adobe could win (my personal view right now is it's Apple's product, they will make the rules for it however they please). But you're right, these companies both probably don't have idiot lawyers so I'm sure Adobe has something up their sleeve.

I don't agree with Apple's stance on it. They should support whatever will possibly run on their own platform, even if it competes with their own. If they can't sell the product, everything else that runs on it is pointless to develop. People will buy more I think if it just does what they want it to do. Again, Apple's product though, they make the rules.

Tarrant64 said,

Yeah, at this point I don't see how Adobe could win (my personal view right now is it's Apple's product, they will make the rules for it however they please). But you're right, these companies both probably don't have idiot lawyers so I'm sure Adobe has something up their sleeve.

I don't agree with Apple's stance on it. They should support whatever will possibly run on their own platform, even if it competes with their own. If they can't sell the product, everything else that runs on it is pointless to develop. People will buy more I think if it just does what they want it to do. Again, Apple's product though, they make the rules.

How could you not see how they have a chance? People beat Nintendo when they had a similar stance, Developers beat microsoft to get access to their hidden API's.... (for those who dont know the nintendo case, it was about Game Geinie being banned... very similar situation)

Edited by neufuse, Apr 13 2010, 10:52pm :

Tarrant64 said,
Yeah, at this point I don't see how Adobe could win (my personal view right now is it's Apple's product, they will make the rules for it however they please).
Antitrust probably. I'd think if they can convince the judge that Apple is a monopoly in some form (the only iPhone hardware maker, the only source for iPhone software, the only source to develop for the iPhone, whatever) it will be a pretty easy win. You convince someone is a monopoly and anything can happen.

Opera knows best.

It could pretty easily be argued that Apple holds a monopoly in the mobile app market. Once that is established, they just need to simply cite the many anti-competetive practices that Apple has engaged in to hold that monopoly, and there's your antitrust case...

Tarrant64 said,

My personal view right now is it's Apple's product, they will make the rules for it however they please.

Wrong. It is **MY** product. I bought and paid for my iPhone and my iPad. There was an agreement that I would buy through the app store when I bought those items, but there is no agreement that Apple should restrict the apps available to me because they know what is best for me. Is this not the same arguments used against MS during the anti-trust suit? That MS is restricting what can and cannot be put on computers that others were buying and selling? Netscape wanted to put an icon on the desktop, MS restricted it, and they complained. The same arguments when MS supposedly locked out DR DOS when using Windows? And many, many more complaints over the years?

Now we are told that this is OK because Apple is involved and it is not MS? And no, jail breaking is not a viable option as either Apple can remotely brick the device or undo the jail breaking with a firmware update. And, as we know from Sony with the Other OS feature, if you don't upgrade, they can exclude you from their networks (more so with the iPhone than the iPad, but still....)

Tarrant64 said,

Yeah, at this point I don't see how Adobe could win (my personal view right now is it's Apple's product, they will make the rules for it however they please). But you're right, these companies both probably don't have idiot lawyers so I'm sure Adobe has something up their sleeve.

I'd assume it has something to do with what you can force people to do through a EULA. Is Apple able to dictate what color shirt you wear while developing iPhone?

cybertimber2008 said,
Antitrust probably. I'd think if they can convince the judge that Apple is a monopoly in some form (the only iPhone hardware maker, the only source for iPhone software, the only source to develop for the iPhone, whatever) it will be a pretty easy win. You convince someone is a monopoly and anything can happen.

Opera knows best.


That last sentence, can't be more true.
+1

cybertimber2008 said,
Antitrust probably. I'd think if they can convince the judge that Apple is a monopoly in some form (the only iPhone hardware maker, the only source for iPhone software, the only source to develop for the iPhone, whatever) it will be a pretty easy win. You convince someone is a monopoly and anything can happen.

Opera knows best.

Yeah, you're right. It'll be interesting to see what happens here though... Apple is treading on thin ice in regards to their relationships with these other companies, so if not Adobe I imagine someone will finally bite them...

JonathanMarston said,
It could pretty easily be argued that Apple holds a monopoly in the mobile app market. Once that is established, they just need to simply cite the many anti-competetive practices that Apple has engaged in to hold that monopoly, and there's your antitrust case...

FWIW, you do not have to be a monopoly to be found guilty of anti-competitive practices in a court of law. The Sherman Act is surprisingly fair, and holds all companies--major and minor--to the same standard. The belief that a bit player can't be charged with violations is one parroted by Apple fanboys, and shows an ignorance of the law. It's about as logical as saying a minority race can't be racist (which would mean it's impossible for a white guy in South Africa to be racist).

A monopoly is perfectly legal to have when won legitimately, and is legal to maintain legitimately. A monopoly is not held to higher standards than lesser competitors, nor must it play by a different set of rules (don't let Europeans tell you otherwise). It is illegal, however, for a monopoly to maintain its status through anti-competitive means. It is also illegal to use anti-competitive means to ACHIEVE a monopoly (this is specifically laid out in legislation). In other words, it's just as illegal for a newbie company to anti-competitively work toward dominating the market as it is for the market leader to do the same to stay on top.

So is everybody clear? Whether Apple has a monopoly or not has absolutely nothing to do with whether a lawsuit holds water.

Edited by Joshie, Apr 14 2010, 2:36am :

neufuse said,

How could you not see how they have a chance? People beat Nintendo when they had a similar stance, Developers beat microsoft to get access to their hidden API's.... (for those who dont know the nintendo case, it was about Game Geinie being banned... very similar situation)

Excepting the fact that the Game Genie didn't require API access, the legal battle involved misappropriation of copyright which is not at issue here, and a number of other factors -- yes, very similar.

Joshie said,

FWIW, you do not have to be a monopoly to be found guilty of anti-competitive practices in a court of law.

Yeah I think they will be stretching their case if they start throwing around monopoly claims and TBH, I don't think they need to anyway. Fighting them on the grounds of anti competitive behavior should be more than adequate.


I'd imagine adobe wouldn't have any trouble rallying up support too in this case. It may not help Apple either that they have been so vocal in their objection to Flash on the platform. While Apple is within their right to not use Flash on the device, they could possibly be seen as going a step further by having a vendetta against them and trying to take them down. I doubt their verbal onslaught will do them any favors in this case anyway.

Edited by Smigit, Apr 14 2010, 8:59am :

Same thing as they did with MS. I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't do this with Apple anyway. Seems Apple can ignore anything.

cybertimber2008 said,
Antitrust probably. I'd think if they can convince the judge that Apple is a monopoly in some form (the only iPhone hardware maker, the only source for iPhone software, the only source to develop for the iPhone, whatever) it will be a pretty easy win. You convince someone is a monopoly and anything can happen.

Opera knows best.

Be careful when you start throwing around the anti-trust thing because Apple is much farther away from being a Monopoly than Adobe. When you think about it how much competition does Adobe have in the market it dominates?

The only other player out there that I know of is Microsoft's Silverlight and the vast majority of sites on the net only allow access via Adobe's Flash. If Apple can show this to be true they'll be able to easily fend of law suits from Adobe.

NPGMBR said,

The only other player out there that I know of is Microsoft's Silverlight and the vast majority of sites on the net only allow access via Adobe's Flash. If Apple can show this to be true they'll be able to easily fend of law suits from Adobe.

difference being Adobe doesn't limit you on the IDE/AS3 translation layer framework you use (or even the compiler, as there are alternate compatible compilers) for you to be able to run your SWF content in their Flash Player (they won't even stop you from charging for said content).

NPGMBR said,

Be careful when you start throwing around the anti-trust thing because Apple is much farther away from being a Monopoly than Adobe. When you think about it how much competition does Adobe have in the market it dominates?

The only other player out there that I know of is Microsoft's Silverlight and the vast majority of sites on the net only allow access via Adobe's Flash. If Apple can show this to be true they'll be able to easily fend of law suits from Adobe.

Once again, you don't need a monopoly to be found guilty of anti-trust violations. The question is whether Apple, who has a stake in HTML5, is anti-competitively locking out access to a competing technology. If Apple is provably trying to strangle Flash in order to make something they've invested in succeed in its place, guess what? Violation.

Joshie said,

Once again, you don't need a monopoly to be found guilty of anti-trust violations. The question is whether Apple, who has a stake in HTML5, is anti-competitively locking out access to a competing technology. If Apple is provably trying to strangle Flash in order to make something they've invested in succeed in its place, guess what? Violation.

I was under the impression that HTML5 was an open technology. Am I wrong? If not then Apple is well within its right to to block Flash because HTML5 is not Apple's own technology.