Epic v Apple: Games developer swings for the fences and ends up guiding others to a treasure it cannot possess

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientific

Abstract

On 10 September 2021, judge Yvonne Gonzales Rogers (YGR) of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California released her judgment in the Epic v Apple case. In doing so, she decided (at least at first instance) one of the most important battles that currently rage in the war around Apple’s restrictions of app developers.

As most antitrust cases, Epic v Apple centers around three pillars: defining the relevant market, establishing the defendant’s market power on that market, and assessing anticompetitive conduct. In what follows, I walk the reader through the essentials of each pillar. However, be warned that in summarizing a 180-page judgment, a lot of detail inevitably gets lost.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2-6
Number of pages5
JournalCompetition Law Insight
Volume20
Issue number10
Publication statusPublished - 17 Dec 2021
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Epic v Apple: Games developer swings for the fences and ends up guiding others to a treasure it cannot possess'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this