rapz
7 hours ago
Apple vs DOJ antitrust suit: 3 big ways your iPhone could change
News By Jon Fingas last updated March 23, 2024
https://www.tomsguide.com/phones/iphones/apple-vs-doj-antitrust-lawsuit-could-change-how-you-use-your-iphone-heres-how
Any changes should be mostly positive for users, if any happen at all
The U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ) lawsuit against Apple is arguably the largest technology antitrust case since the battle with Microsoft at the turn of the century. Regulators are effectively challenging Apple’s core business model — the company may have to rework some of its tightly integrated ecosystem.
How much of a difference will this really make? Depending on how the case gets resolved, it could significantly impact how you use your iPhone, though it may not be as big a deal as you might imagine.
More choices for apps, with limits
The DOJ lawsuit mostly revolves around Apple’s control over third-party iPhone apps. Outside of the European Union, where officials have already made Apple loosen its policies through the Digital Markets Act, you’re limited to downloading software through the company’s official App Store. Moreover, Apple sets limits on what third-party apps can do on your iPhone. You can’t use all-in-one “super apps,” certain digital wallets, or third-party SMS texting apps, among other programs.
If successful, the DOJ could require that Apple allow third-party app stores like you find on Android (and soon on the iPhone in the EU). You could have a wider selection of apps, particularly titles that Apple wouldn’t otherwise allow.
No matter where you get your apps, they could also improve in capability. They could perform more tasks in the background, bundle a collection of mini-apps, or offer SMS messaging on top of an online-only chat service. You wouldn’t have to rely as much on Apple’s software, and it might be easier to switch to Android as a result. “Apple will be forced to open up its ecosystem,” says Hanish Bhatia, an associate director at Counterpoint Technology Market Research. “This means higher interoperability across different ecosystems for payments, apps, messaging and devices.”
.....
More powerful messaging and wallet apps
While the DOJ wants to improve third-party iOS apps as a whole, it singles out issues with messaging and wallet apps.
Only Apple’s own Messages app can offer both internet-based and SMS messaging on the iPhone. Without iMessage on Android, you risk missing out on conversations if you leave the iPhone. You also lose media quality and useful features like encryption and typing indicators.
The antitrust case could improve things by allowing third-party apps with SMS, and broader support for iMessage. You wouldn’t have to switch between Apple Messages and your preferred chat app just to stay in touch with friends, and you could stay in touch from Android if iMessage comes to that operating system.
.....
CNET
The US Lawsuit Against Apple Raises Questions About iPhone and Android's Future
https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/the-us-lawsuit-against-apple-raises-questions-about-iphone-and-androids-future/
Commentary: The US government is asking for a more open iPhone just as smartphones themselves could undergo their next fundamental change.
Lisa Eadicicco, March 23, 2024 5:00 a.m. PT
It's a debate as old as the smartphone itself: iPhone or Android? You probably made up your mind a long time ago and never looked back.
Now a landmark antitrust lawsuit wants to change that, claiming that it should be easier to switch between the world's two largest mobile operating systems. The complaint, brought by the US Department of Justice and 16 state and district attorneys general, accuses Apple of locking iPhone users into its ecosystem through monopolistic practices that make it hard to leave.
The 88-page lawsuit argues that Apple's tight grip on its software, hardware and app marketplace makes third-party apps and smartwatches significantly less appealing to iPhone users, therefore stifling innovation and resulting in fewer choices for consumers. Above all else, the complaint alleges these policies entrench iPhone users by imposing barriers when switching to Android.
Anyone who owns a smartphone is probably familiar with the green versus blue bubble conundrum, which has become the exemplar for the discrepancy between iPhone and Android. While a large portion of the complaint focuses on messaging, it extends way beyond that to include allegations related to the App Store, Apple Wallet and the Apple Watch.
That last part is significant because it calls Apple's entire ecosystem approach into question. Regulators and critics have scrutinized the App Store for years, as evidenced by the blockbuster legal battle between Apple and Fortnite maker Epic Games. The Justice Department's antitrust suit goes a step further by pushing for the iPhone to become more open and platform-agnostic on a fundamental level.
=====
Apple's walled garden is crumbling — EU orders iOS to open up to third-party devices
News By Tom Pritchard published March 20, 2025
https://www.tomsguide.com/phones/iphones/eu-is-ordering-apple-to-open-up-ios-even-more-offering-better-access-for-headphones-smartwatches-and-other-accessories
GreenBackClub
7 hours ago
VOIP-PAL.COM, INC. v. T-Mobile US, Inc. (6:21-cv-00674)
District Court, W.D. Texas
Document
Number Date Filed Description Download PDF
307 Mar 26, 2025 VOIP-PAL.COM, INC. v. T-Mobile US, Inc. (6:21-cv-00674) Notice of Appeal
GreenBackClub
2 days ago
VOIP-PAL.COM, INC. v. Verizon Communications, Inc. et al
Texas Western District Court
Judge: Alan D Albright
Case #: 6:21-cv-00672
Nature of Suit 830 Property Rights - Patent
Cause 35:271 Patent Infringement
Case Filed: Jun 25, 2021
Terminated: Aug 15, 2024
Docket
Parties (5)
Opinions (2)
Docket last updated: 9 hours ago
Monday, March 24, 2025
233 misc Response Mon 03/24 4:57 PM
RESPONSE in Opposition to225 Sealed Motion Verizon Supplemental Submission in Support of Its Motion for Attorneys Fees by Verizon Business Network Services, Inc., Verizon Communications, Inc., Verizon Services Corp. by VOIP-PAL.COM, INC.. (Hudnell, Lewis)
232 transcript Transcript Filed Mon 03/24 4:23 AM
Transcript filed of Proceedings held on 3-5-25, Proceedings Transcribed: Motion Hearing. Court Reporter/Transcriber: Kristie Davis (kmdaviscsr@yahoo.com), Telephone number: 2546660904. Parties are notified of their duty to review the transcript to ensure compliance with the FRCP 5.2(a)/FRCrP 49.1(a). A copy may be purchased from the court reporter or viewed at the clerk's office public terminal. If redaction is necessary, a Notice of Redaction Request must be filed within 21 days. If no such Notice is filed, the transcript will be made available via PACER without redaction after 90 calendar days. The clerk will mail a copy of this notice to parties not electronically noticed Redaction Request due 4/14/2025, Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 4/24/2025, Release of Transcript Restriction set for 6/23/2025, (kd)
VVVVVV
6 days ago
Well, that’s your opinion and you’re entitled to one but, I bet you’re just venting. No fact that they’re not negotiating. We can only go by what the court was told.
Full disclosure, I don’t pretend to know and or understand these RICO allegations. But, if they’re in fact true, VPLM is in a position of tremendous strength. You can bet, after their crew of attorneys verify all these claims and if they’re true, there more than likely be a deal done.
Now, remember there’s still the remaining RBR patents. They know whether they’re infringing or not. If they realize there’s value, this will encourage an acquisition. Win win
IMHO
VVVVVV
7 days ago
There’s no reason for more media coverage at this time. Not sure what exactly it is you don’t seem to comprehend? Emil made it clear they’re negotiating, hence the reason for the extension.
Emil previously stated that if there’s no progress, then VPLM would serve. He then sent out notice that they’d serve. Well, what do you think he did that for? Come on pal, use your head.
They’re not negotiating a few hundred million dollars. These cases take time. The big three probably have fifteen attorneys each evaluating these charges. Not to mention evaluating the possible value of the RBR patents, etc. If they realize VPLM has a legitimate RICO case, then they’ll agree on a fair and reasonable agreement. But, if they believe it’s merit less, then they’ll fight it.
More than likely the only way Emil and his wife can sell a few billion shares, is an acquisition!
It would be naive to think this can be done in ninety days.
I believe the hold up in serving is a good thing. Shareholders shouldn’t be wanting for that to happen.
IMHO