Supreme Court Allows App Store Monopoly Lawsuit Against Apple to Proceed [Updated]

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday ruled 5-4 against Apple in an anticompetitive case involving the App Store, allowing iPhone users to move forward with their class action lawsuit against the company, as first reported by CNBC.

app store monopoly
From the Supreme Court's ruling:

In this case, however, several consumers contend that Apple charges too much for apps. The consumers argue, in particular, that Apple has monopolized the retail market for the sale of apps and has unlawfully used its monopolistic power to charge consumers higher-than competitive prices.

A claim that a monopolistic retailer (here, Apple) has used its monopoly to overcharge consumers is a classic antitrust claim. But Apple asserts that the consumer plaintiffs in this case may not sue Apple because they supposedly were not "direct purchasers" from Apple under our decision in Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois, 431 U. S. 720.

We disagree. The plaintiffs purchased apps directly from Apple and therefore are direct purchasers under Illinois Brick. At this early pleadings stage of the litigation, we do not assess the merits of the plaintiffs' antitrust claims against Apple, nor do we consider any other defenses Apple might have. We merely hold that the Illinois Brick direct-purchaser rule does not bar these plaintiffs from suing Apple under the antitrust laws. We affirm the judgment of the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

The lawsuit was filed in 2011 by a group of ‌iPhone‌ users who believe Apple violates federal antitrust laws by requiring apps to be sold through its ‌App Store‌, where it collects a 30 percent commission from all purchases, leading to inflated prices as developers pass on the cost of the commission to customers.

In other words, the ‌iPhone‌ users believe that apps would be priced lower outside of the ‌App Store‌, as Apple's 30 percent cut would not be baked in to prices.

The lawsuit was initially dismissed in 2013 by a California district court due to errors in the complaint, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit revived the case in 2017. Apple then appealed with the Supreme Court.

From the start, Apple has argued that it doesn't set prices for paid apps, and that charging a 30 percent commission on the distribution of paid apps and in-app purchases does not violate antitrust laws in the United States. In 2017, the U.S. Department of Justice filed an amicus brief in support of Apple.

Update: Apple has issued a statement (via John Packzowski) regarding the decision:

Today's decision means plaintiffs can proceed with their case in District court. We're confident we will prevail when the facts are presented and that the App Store is not a monopoly by any metric.

We're proud to have created the safest, most secure and trusted platform for customers and a great business opportunity for all developers around the world. Developers set the price they want to charge for their app and Apple has no role in that. That vast majority of apps on the App Store are free and Apple gets nothing from them. The only instance where Apple shares in revenue is if the developer chooses to sell digital services through the App Store.

Developers have a number of platforms to choose from to deliver their software — from other apps stores, to Smart TVs to gaming consoles — and we work hard every day to make our store is the best, safest and most competitive in the world.

The Supreme Court's full ruling is embedded ahead.

Popular Stories

iOS 26

15 New Things Your iPhone Can Do in iOS 26.2

Friday December 5, 2025 9:40 am PST by
Apple is about to release iOS 26.2, the second major point update for iPhones since iOS 26 was rolled out in September, and there are at least 15 notable changes and improvements worth checking out. We've rounded them up below. Apple is expected to roll out iOS 26.2 to compatible devices sometime between December 8 and December 16. When the update drops, you can check Apple's servers for the ...
Intel Inside iPhone Feature

Apple's Return to Intel Rumored to Extend to iPhone

Friday December 5, 2025 10:08 am PST by
Intel is expected to begin supplying some Mac and iPad chips in a few years, and the latest rumor claims the partnership might extend to the iPhone. In a research note with investment firm GF Securities this week, obtained by MacRumors, analyst Jeff Pu said he and his colleagues "now expect" Intel to reach a supply deal with Apple for at least some non-pro iPhone chips starting in 2028....
iPhone 14 Pro Dynamic Island

iPhone 18 Pro Leak Adds New Evidence for Under-Display Face ID

Monday December 8, 2025 4:54 am PST by
Apple is actively testing under-screen Face ID for next year's iPhone 18 Pro models using a special "spliced micro-transparent glass" window built into the display, claims a Chinese leaker. According to "Smart Pikachu," a Weibo account that has previously shared accurate supply-chain details on Chinese Android hardware, Apple is testing the special glass as a way to let the TrueDepth...
iPhone 17 Pro Cosmic Orange

10 Reasons to Wait for Next Year's iPhone 18 Pro

Monday December 1, 2025 2:40 am PST by
Apple's iPhone development roadmap runs several years into the future and the company is continually working with suppliers on several successive iPhone models at the same time, which is why we often get rumored features months ahead of launch. The iPhone 18 series is no different, and we already have a good idea of what to expect for the iPhone 18 Pro and iPhone 18 Pro Max. One thing worth...
Johny Srouji

Apple Chip Chief Johny Srouji Could Be Next to Go as Exodus Continues

Sunday December 7, 2025 10:41 am PST by
Apple's senior vice president of hardware technologies Johny Srouji could be the next leading executive to leave the company amid an alarming exodus of leading employees, Bloomberg's Mark Gurman reports. Srouji apparently recently told CEO Tim Cook that he is "seriously considering leaving" in the near future. He intends to join another company if he departs. Srouji leads Apple's chip design ...
iOS 26

Apple Seeds Second iOS 26.2 Release Candidate to Developers and Public Beta Testers

Monday December 8, 2025 10:18 am PST by
Apple today seeded the second release candidate version of iOS 26.2 to developers and public beta testers, with the software coming one week after Apple seeded the first RC. The release candidate represents the final version iOS 26.2 that will be provided to the public if no further bugs are found. Registered developers and public beta testers can download the betas from the Settings app on...
top stories 2025 12 04a

Top Stories: iOS 26.2 Coming Soon, Apple Execs Depart, and More

Saturday December 6, 2025 6:00 am PST by
You'd expect things to be starting to wind down for the holidays by now, but that doesn't seem to be the case yet in the world of Apple news, with Apple just about ready to release iOS 26.2 and other operating system updates to the public. There was also a flurry of news this week about Apple executive departures, some expected and some not so expected, while we also learned that Apple and...
Johny Srouji

Apple's Chipmaking Chief Johny Srouji Responds to Report About Him Potentially Leaving

Monday December 8, 2025 9:23 am PST by
Apple's chipmaking chief Johny Srouji has reportedly indicated that he plans to continue working for the company for the foreseeable future. "I love my team, and I love my job at Apple, and I don't plan on leaving anytime soon," said Srouji, in a memo obtained by Bloomberg's Mark Gurman. Here is Srouji's full memo, as shared by Bloomberg:I know you've been reading all kind of rumors and...
ive and altman

Jony Ive's OpenAI Device Barred From Using 'io' Name

Friday December 5, 2025 6:22 am PST by
A U.S. appeals court has upheld a temporary restraining order that prevents OpenAI and Jony Ive's new hardware venture from using the name "io" for products similar to those planned by AI audio startup iyO, Bloomberg Law reports. iyO sued OpenAI earlier this year after the latter announced its partnership with Ive's new firm, arguing that OpenAI's planned "io" branding was too close to its...

Top Rated Comments

johnrlaporta Avatar
86 months ago
How ridiculous. If they stopped charging the 30%, the companies would just keep the price the same and pocket the 30% Who wouldn't?
Score: 46 Votes (Like | Disagree)
macjoshua Avatar
86 months ago
They can always buy an Android phone if they want a more open and potentially insecure way of getting apps.
Score: 45 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Rogifan Avatar
86 months ago
Good. It IS a monopoly.

As I've said repeatedly, it's not Apple's iPhone, it's MY iPhone. I should have the choice to install apps from whatever source I desire, and I shouldn't have to go through ridiculous machinations with Xcode every week to do it.
It’s not though. You’re basically buying a license to software that comes with an end user license agreement (EULA) which dictates what can and can’t be done with the software. It’s not a monopoly because one can easily buy something else.
Score: 44 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Victor Mortimer Avatar
86 months ago
Good. It IS a monopoly.

As I've said repeatedly, it's not Apple's iPhone, it's MY iPhone. I should have the choice to install apps from whatever source I desire, and I shouldn't have to go through ridiculous machinations with Xcode every week to do it.
Score: 36 Votes (Like | Disagree)
TimFL1 Avatar
86 months ago
Will be interesting to see how this plays out....
It wont. This will go nowhere, platform holders take cuts everywhere (console stores, Steam, Epic Store, literally any marketplace on earth does so to finance the delivery of said content).
30% is the average fee, it‘s ugly but everyone does it.

I, for one, am against having other places than the App Store for app distribution. One unified place to get your apps (securely and up-to-date) from beats out the mess you find on Android.
Score: 33 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Rogifan Avatar
86 months ago
No You can’t!
Because apple has a walled garden too. If You have a watch?
Again no one is personally forced to own any Apple product.
Score: 24 Votes (Like | Disagree)