ICYMI: DOJ’s Flawed Lawsuit Against Apple Would Harm American Consumers, Innovation 

Washington, D.C. (3/28/2024) – Following the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) decision to sue Apple, reporting and industry experts have detailed the negative impact this suit would have on consumers and innovation and the flawed logic that underpins the DOJ’s case. 

Bloomberg Government Chief Correspondent Mark Gurman outlines how the DOJ’s case fails to show any harm to consumers: 

“…(T)he case relies mostly on outdated arguments and cites problems that Apple is already resolving. But perhaps the biggest flaw in the case: It does little to prove that Apple has harmed consumers. The lawsuit claims that the main reason people hold on to their iPhones is because Apple makes it difficult to switch, not because people — I dunno — actually like their iPhones…”

In a recent Washington Postcolumn, Adam Lashinsky argues that the DOJ’s “slapdash” lawsuit isn’t ready for prime time. 

“​​There was something curiously slapdash about the Justice Department’s March 21 complaint against Apple, as if the country’s top antitrust cops aren’t sure of themselves — despite having spent five years working on their theory of the case…

“…It makes me wonder whether the lawsuit, touted as ‘landmark’ because the feds and 16 states are going after one of the country’s most admired companies, will amount instead to a costly and protracted ankle-biting exercise…”

A group of investment and research analysts surveyed by Barron’s underscored the weak claims made by the DOJ and stated that the facts of the case ultimately favor Apple: 

“…The Department of Justice has filed its long-telegraphed suit against Apple, and it will doubtless be a long process that will produce negative headlines, but we think that Apple will prevail in the end…Apple does not have a monopoly on the broader smartphone or digital gaming markets…

According to a recent Yahoo Financearticle, many legal experts believe the DOJ’s case is unlikely to hold up under scruntiny. Boston College antitrust law professor David Olson argued that he doubts the DOJ’s claims will hold up in court, stating that “it’s usually a pretty hard case to say that someone has to…change the way they are running their company.” University of Chicago law professor Randy Picker agreed, saying that he believes “Apple will prevail in the end.” 

The Don’t Break What Works campaign is powered by the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA). Learn more here.