'The DOJ's Assault on Apple Will Harm Consumers'

> A 2022 poll conducted by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce found that "70% of voters oppose Congressional proposals to add new antitrust regulations." Even more, when reading descriptions of the policies included in the American Innovation and Choice Online Act, 79 percent of Republicans, 72 percent of independents, and 59 percent of Democrats said they would oppose the bill.

The seasoned critical reader of political pieces will detect a smell here.

If you follow a couple links, here’s the poll questionnaire itself:

https://www.uschamber.com/assets/documents/Chamber-Antitrust...

> Instead of fostering innovation and competition, this approach threatens to stifle the very progress that benefits Americans.

How much more can you pervert the truth? It is Apple that's stifling innovation and competition.

So I guess apple is funding propaganda to get their way now.

Remember when Apple sued Samsung for copying basic UI designs? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc._v._Samsung_Electron...

> Digital markets do not need more government regulation; they need more companies willing to innovate and compete

Fully agreed. So why are you defending what is essentially a (private, even) regulator in the crucial sector of smartphone software?

It would be more accurate to say the dojs lack of breaking up apple, google, facebook, amazon et al has harmed and continues to harm consumers. Pe hates breaking them up because it will end the gravy train of abusing dark patterns to grow a monthly recurring user base and selling it to the above at inflated prices to maintain their market power but it is necessary. We need pe doing the much harder job of funding compabies with better ideas that can stand on their own amd grow into the next company that needs to be broken up for having too much market power (a task that takes twice as long and is less of a sure bet vs the currrent model). Post ww2 we broke up too many companies too soon, in the 70s and 80s we swung way to far to laissez faire and now we need to swing hard back towards pre 70s thinking but not quite all the way back.

It might. In the short term anyway. And that's ok because consumers are not the Apple customer being egregiously harmed. It's the developers, who are also Apple customers, who are being restricted from a market. Apple makes a competitive app, BAM, you're out of there. Even if you have enough clout to remain, you're now competitively disadvantaged because Apple are taking some of your income, as well as profiting off their own service.

> Far from being an "anticompetitive" practice that harms consumers, Apple's careful approach to app integration is a pro-competitive way in which it meets its users' demands.

It is extremely likely that this particular turn of phrase "Apple's careful approach to app integration is a pro-competitive way" was crafted by a lobbyist.

I would wait and see if such language starts to crop up in Apple's subsequent PR efforts. Reframing Apple's store as "app integration" is fiendishly clever BS.

Why would anyone care what Rand Paul thinks?