Apple Customers Are More Brand Loyal Than Its Competitors, Court Finds

Apple's Brand Loyalty Favors Antitrust Case

Last week, I decided to temporarily switch from my iPhone to an Android phone and found that much of the routine I had developed around my iPhone was disrupted.

I have been an iPhone user since the first generation was released in 2007, and, like many others, own and use other Apple products, including an iPad, Apple Watch, and AirPods, that sync and work nicely with my phone.

This type of brand loyalty is a significant component of an antitrust lawsuit against Apple in the Netherlands, where the company faces allegations that it deliberately created an ecosystem where customers unknowingly become dependent on its products, pushing out competition and innovation.

On Tuesday, a Dutch court agreed, ruling that the Cupertino tech giant had violated competition laws and ordered it to allow dating app developers to offer alternative payment systems within the app, circumventing Apple's 30% commission.

The ruling is a significant milestone in the three-year lawsuit and could serve as a precedent for future cases, though Apple has indicated it will appeal the decision.

For those who have closely followed the case, the verdict may not come as a surprise.

The Dutch Competition Authority, or NCA, which filed the case in 2019, argued that Apple's behavior was anti-competitive and in violation of European Union standards that prohibit companies from abusing their dominance in a market.

The authority cited several examples, including making it difficult for developers to communicate with customers and exerting pressure on them to use Apple's in-house payments system, which leads to higher prices for consumers.

"In practice, the App Store is the only way for app providers to reach users of iPhones and iPads," the NCA said in a statement at the time. "This position is strengthened by the fact that Apple has absolute control over the iOS operating system and the App Store, and can freely determine the conditions under which apps can be offered."

The NCA also pointed to Apple's "clawback" policy, which punishes developers who offer cheaper prices on other platforms or through their websites by taking a larger cut of the proceeds, up to a 75% margin.

Apple's widespread use and hefty commissions have made it a target for antitrust lawsuits and investigations in the US and Europe, where regulators are increasingly pushing back against the company's dominance.

In the US, attorneys general from nearly three-dozen states have filed an antitrust lawsuit against Apple, accusing the company of using its market power to manipulate app prices and squeeze competitors, although a federal judge ruled last month that the lawsuit, which focused on Apple's cut of in-app purchases, did not provide enough evidence to argue the company was a monopolist.

The European Commission, the EU's executive arm, is also probing Apple's practices, as are regulators in the UK and some other countries.

In Tuesday's ruling, the court concluded that Apple's App Store practices had violated Dutch competition laws, specifically the prohibition of a company abusing its dominant market position, and ordered the company to lift restrictions on alternative payment systems for dating apps.

"Apple has to allow alternatives," the judge, Wilbert Paulissen, said at a press conference after the ruling. "It is not allowed to impose unreasonable trading conditions on app providers."

The judge declined to specify when Apple must comply, saying the company had made a reasonable case to appeal the ruling and that any enforcement would be delayed until that process concluded.

Apple has said it will appeal, which could lead to a higher Dutch court reconsidering the decision. In a statement sent to Dutch newspaper Het Financieele Dagblad, the company said the ruling "will do little to advance the interests of Dutch consumers" and emphasized the security of the App Store ecosystem.

"We are concerned that this ruling will undermine an important source of assurance for customers, as well as undercut the very foundations of privacy and data security protections," the company said.

While the case involves App Store policies specifically for dating apps, it could ultimately have broader implications for other apps and developers, especially if the ruling is upheld in future appeals.

"I would definitely expect to see more lawsuits on this front," said Gennie Gebhart, acting director of research and advocacy at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, who was not involved in the case. "It would be very surprising if this didn't set a precedent."

For now, Apple faces similar antitrust lawsuits from developers and regulators in several countries and is poised to defend its ecosystem as the sole method for customer contact and billing.

The company maintains that its fees are standard in the industry and help cover the costs of maintaining the App Store and preventing malicious apps from reaching users.

It remains to be seen whether the ruling will lead to meaningful changes for developers and how Apple operates its App Store, but for now, Apple customers like myself can continue our routine of using exclusively Apple products.

Read more